
Grapegrowers in Oregon's Willamette Valley are cheering two recent court decisions backing strict land use rules in their state. The rules, which limit development, especially in agricultural and forest areas, are crucial to preserving Oregon's wine regions, they argue. After 40 years of debate, however, the battle over land use is far from over.
The contentious fight over development rights stretches back to 1973, when Oregon's legislature passed what was then the most comprehensive land use law in the country. It mandated that each county develop a plan that would allow the state's population to grow but also protect farmland and undeveloped areas. It has been challenged repeatedly: Developers and various companies argued that the restrictions were unfriendly to business; property owners argued that the rules unfairly lowered their land values and were a virtual government land grab.
In 2004, voters passed Measure 37, which gave property owners the right to develop their land under rules that were in effect when they bought it. Supporters claimed it would protect property owners' rights and allow them to divide large rural properties and build a few houses on them. Leigh Ellison is a doctor whose family owns 100 acres in the heart of Oregon’s Willamette Valley. She voted in favor of Measure 37 when it was proposed. “We felt that property owners should have the right to do with their land as they saw fit without interference from the state,” said Ellison.
But after the vote, Ellison and other residents were alarmed by the consequences, especially the idea of large housing developments on farmland. “A landslide of applications for housing developments, subdivisions, quarries, strip malls, casinos and a lot of other nutty stuff” in valuable wine country areas were filed, said Eric Lemelson, owner of Lemelson Vineyards in the Willamette Valley. “I had to buy land from neighbors who were talking about filing a claim to allow them to develop dozens of homes on a piece of land with good vineyard potential and no groundwater.”
By early 2007, landowners had filed 7,562 claims for land use waivers on 750,898 acres statewide. One environmental group said the claims included 98,202 acres in the Willamette wine region. The legislature responded by creating Measure 49, which voters approved that November. The new law prevented commercial or industrial development on land previously reserved for homes, farms or forest. It did allow property owners to build up to three homes on their farmland.
Challenges were inevitable, and a federal judge ruled in 2008 that any claims already approved under Measure 37 were binding contracts. But in July, a federal court of appeals overturned that decision. And on Sept. 1, Oregon's Court of Appeals rejected a challenge to the law filed by a man who had approval under 37 to build a 39-acre subdivision of homes in Yamhill County, the heart of Willamette wine country. This is the first of four challenges in Yamhill and may set a precedent for the others. The legal battle could also impact other western wine regions, where development is always a sensitive issue.
“Oregon winegrowers know the importance of preserving prime agricultural land," said David Adelsheim, president of Adelsheim Vineyard, in a statement after the ruling. "Oregon’s land use laws are the reason our industry exists today. Without Oregon’s comprehensive land use system, the hillsides our industry needs to produce the best grapes would have been dotted with housing developments instead of rows of Pinot noir vines. We need to be able to count on the same protections going forward to ensure that Oregon wines continue to flourish.”
Stacy Hughes — Regina, SK — November 10, 2010 5:24pm ET
Tom Miller — Vestavia Hills, AL — November 11, 2010 1:28pm ET
Ten years ago at an IPNC at Linfield College in McMinnville, I was standing in the Torrefazione line on Friday morning and got into a conversation with the distinguished-looking gentleman in front of me. I had been to many of these previous IPNCs and he asked me what I thought had been the biggest change in the Willamette Valley since the first IPNC in 1987. Instead of some "deep" reply about the noticeable increase in quality winemaking, the influx of new owners/winemakers/vineyards in the area, the information sharing amongst winemakers from Oregon, France, California, New Zealand and other Pinot-growing regions or the increase in vineyard-designated wines, without thinking I blurted out "urban sprawl." I recall lamenting the fact that, in the 1980s, one could leave the Portland airport and arrive in McMinnville in 45 minutes. The constant southwestward-spreading of the urban sprawl from Portland had doubled travel time and made the drive much less scenic and enjoyable. At that time, the hillsides seemed to be covered with housing developments all the way out Hwy. 99W to the Rex Hill and Chehalem wineries.
I found out later that morning that the gentleman in line with me was Frank Prial, one of my wine-writing heroes. He and Leslie Sbrocco, who was next to Mr. Prial in line, were that year's IPNC Masters of Ceremonies. I always felt like a real dolt for not giving him a thoughtful, Oregon wine geek reply to his question. Hopefully the court system will side with David Adelsheim and all the other Oregon winegrowers who want to preserve the agricultural integrity of the Willamette Valley and beyond...and keep my reply to Mr. Prial from becoming prophetic.
Want to join or start a discussion? Become a WineSpectator.com member and you can!
To protect the quality of our conversations, only members may submit comments. To learn more about member benefits, take our site tour.
Sips & Tips | Wine & Healthy Living
Video Theater | Collecting & Auctions
» View samples
» Or sign up now!
» Manage my newsletter preferences

The marketplace for all your wine needs, including:
Wine Storage | Wine Clubs
Dining & Travel | Wine Auctions
Wine Shops | Wine Accessories
This does not surprise me as wealthy individuals, developers, or those who want to develope, come in and buy large tracts of land because they can afford to, then their self serving interests for profit take over and they can ruin alot of good agricultural land because they think they now what is best.
Oregon is beautiful and as a previous visitor to the region I would be quite disappointed if I came through again to see small mom and pop developements dotted in and about the valleys, it would be highly disappointing.
Developement is needed at times, but think about what they can ruin, it needs to be approved and applied in the proper area's.
This is great wine country and I have been a buyer of Oregon wines for many many years, the only problem I have now is, it is so popular that it is hard to obtain anymore at reasonable prices up here in Canada. Good Luck