Posts By Date
By: Maria Smith, HCS-OSU
We’re halfway through the year 2026, and the rollercoaster ride has been a wild one. I have been curious for a while just how our vine phenology has been matching up with long-term changes to weather patterns, and I will put together a look at this soon. However, for the upcoming July 4th holiday, let me put it in baseball metaphor: the weather swings taken by this year have sent the ball out of the park.
Let’s take a quick glance at the weather over the first half of the growing season…
Temperatures and Growing Degree Days (Wooster)
The following figures will summarize monthly average temperature, total monthly precipitation, and growing degree days (GDD; daily average temp – base 50F), which represent heat accumulation units that correspond with phenological development of plant growth cycles.
By far, the greatest deviation in temperatures and precipitation came during April, which saw an overall average temperature deviation of nearly +7F and 3.5” of rainfall greater than the 30-year averages (Figure 1). This was particularly notable for early April, which is what drove so much rapid, early budbreak development and widespread frost damage. For growing degree days, the 30-year average for monthly GDD accumulation is 146. April 2026 accumulated a whopping 259 (+113). In contrast, April 2025 saw 159 and April 2024, our prior notable season of early budbreak, 182.
May and June snapped back and cooled down substantially compared with April, but by that point, the damage was done.
Can this pattern be related to this year’s building El Niño year? Probably. El Niño conditions officially developed earlier this month, which tends to mean, for Ohio, to expect overall cooler, wetter summer conditions, and warmer, drier winter conditions. That isn’t to say that we can’t still have punctuation marks throughout the year (!), as I write this at the start of a “heat dome” today…
What then do I anticipate for the rest of 2026? Idealistic, optimistic me says we can expect an extended fall that lends itself towards full maturation for the fruit that we do have in Ohio this season and a lovely yellowing descent into vine acclimation for this winter. Of course, I want to be balanced to the converse, which says we could be looking at managing late season fruit rots and a winter that is marked by temperature swings that cause more bud injury. But let’s set the cynicism aside for today.
Figure 1. Weather conditions (precipitation, average temperature, and GDD) from April 1 - June 28, 2026 for Hort Unit 2 in Wooster, OH. Data from https://newa.cornell.edu
Phenology
We have been moving at a good clip at Unit 2 this year, and we are currently on schedule to be approximately 1 week ahead of the 2025 growing season. Here is a look across several cultivars at Hort Unit 2 for budbreak and bloom:
Table 1: Phenology (budbreak (BB) and bloom) of key cultivars at Hort Unit 2, Wooster, OH for 2026 and 2025.
|
Cultivar |
50% BB (2026) |
GDD (Jan 1-BB 2026) |
50% Bloom (2026) |
GDD (Jan 1 - Bloom 2026) |
50% BB (2025) |
GDD (Jan 1 – BB 2025) |
50% Bloom (2025) |
GDD (Jan 1 - Bloom 2025) |
|
Cabernet Franc |
13-April |
182 |
8-June |
727 |
21-April |
134 |
13-June |
650 |
|
Chardonnay |
13-April |
182 |
6-June |
683 |
23-April |
153 |
13-June |
540 |
|
Marquette |
13-April |
182 |
1-June |
616 |
23-April |
153 |
9-June |
582 |
|
Frontenac Blanc |
13-April |
182 |
8-June |
727 |
23-April |
153 |
5-June |
512 |
|
Petite Pearl |
17-April |
264 |
1-June |
616 |
25-April |
178 |
9-June |
582 |
|
Clarion |
13-April |
182 |
1-June |
616 |
21-April |
134 |
9-June |
582 |
|
Itasca |
13-April |
182 |
1-June |
616 |
21-April |
134 |
5-June |
512 |
Bloom into fruit set:
Grapes exhibit a “double sigmoidal” growth curve, with two distinct phases of berry growth, one following fruit set (rapid cell division) and one from veraison to harvest (rapid cell expansion). We are currently in the first phase, where we have gone from flower to pea-size berries over the course of the past two weeks (Figure 2). In contrast to the 2025 season, we had overall good bloom-time weather conditions with moderate temperatures and dry conditions, leading to much better fruit set. When we reach lag-phase in a few weeks, we will be conducting crop estimates to understand how much yield we can anticipate towards harvest.
Figure 2. Chambourcin at pea-size on June 25, 2026 at Hort Unit 2, Wooster, OH.
Canopy Management
June is the peak of canopy management time, where we wrap up shoot thinning and move directly into shoot positioning, wire placement, and leaf removal (Figure 3). I’d like to take a moment to refresh a few points on leaf removal here:
Figure 3. Diane Kinney conducting leaf removal in Chardonnay at Hort Unit 2, Wooster, OH. (For those noticing the weed growth, we do in fact have weeds, contact herbicides were applied folloiwng the completion of leaf removal last week)
Leaf removal is a promoted targeted practice in Ohio to optimize sunlight exposure into the fruit zone of the canopy – it does not universally apply for every cultivar nor every training system.
-
Why conduct leaf removal? It improves canopy airflow, spray penetration, and sunlight interception into the fruit zone. For the Eastern US broadly, it is a key practice for disease management. For cooler regions and seasons, it promotes increased berry phenolic development in skin (increased color, mouthfeel, and riper aromas) and improved fruit composition (more sugar, lower acid).
- Sun burn, especially under hot and high sun exposure conditions, is a major risk associated with leaf removal (Figure 4). Caution should be taken for weeks like this where, again, we’re under heat advisory conditions… Leaf removal is best performed under cooler, cloudier weather (maybe next week?)
- Traditionally, leaf removal is performed as close to fruit set as possible. This again minimizes sun burn risk. However, it’s common for that timing to extend about a month past fruit set.
-
How much canopy to expose? For red cultivars on Vertical Shoot Positioning, we typically will remove leaves on both sides of the canopy. For white cultivars or cultivars on High Wire Cordon, we may selectively remove only the leaves shaded side of the canopy (E or N sides)
Figure 4. Berry sunburn on HWC Marquette grapes following leaf removal. June 25, 2026, Hort Unit 2, Wooster, OH
Other notable issues around the state
Two major problems have arisen in the past month that have left a major imprint on the 2026 growing season:
-
More auxinic herbicide drift injury. This year has been particularly bad given the short windows of dry weather for herbicide applicators. Applications have been coinciding with the slowdown in growth in May and early June that has caused major crop-loss events in several vineyards (Figure 5). Record keeping/documentation, on site weather data, and reporting are all key and timely when it comes to responding to herbicide drift injury. Timeliness is important, and complaints can be filed with ODA directly.
Figure 5. Significant 2,4-D herbicide injury pre-bloom in Vitis hybrid on May 29, 2026. -
Vine collapse (Figure 6) occurs when vascular tissue has been compromised, and the vine cannot move resources (water, nutrients, sugar) to sustain active shoot growth. This damage to the vine’s vasculature can occur through abiotic (e.g., cold injury, weedwhackers, girdling) or biotic stressors (e.g., crown gall, trunk disease).
There has been a notable amount of trunk injury (cracking, splitting) from both winter extreme lows and spring freeze stress that has been causing vine collapse this year. These injury events also contribute significantly to crown gall and trunk infections that may take time to become notable problems. Vines tend to be resilient, and while certainly demoralizing, they can usually be retrained from new growth suckers that arise from the beneath the trunk damage. This, however, may be less true for older vines that do not readily sucker. We have experienced several instances at the Wooster Vineyard where vines could not sustain additional cumulative damage and warrant replacement.
Figure 6. Early season vine collapse in Cabernet Sauvignon following winter injury, June 8, 2026, Ashtabula County, OH. Note that vine retraining can be conducted from new suckers emerging from the base of the vine that was protected with soil hilling in the fall of 2025.
By: Lisa Dunlap, OSU-HCS
This year marked my first time coordinating and directing the Ohio Wine Competition. After shadowing Todd Steiner, our former director, for several years, I thought I had a solid grasp of what I was stepping into. I quickly learned I had underestimated just how much work goes into orchestrating an event of this scale. But once the whirlwind of organizing hundreds of wines settled, the competition itself unfolded smoothly and successfully.
To offer full transparency into how this event comes together from start to finish, I wanted to share an inside look at the operations, decisions, and logistics behind the 2026 Ohio Wine Competition.
A New Host Site and New Tools
For many years, Kent State Ashtabula graciously hosted the competition. When they were unable to do so this year, we faced two options:
-
Host the event through The Ohio State University Enology Extension, or
-
Outsource the judging to a third party competition in another state.
OSU Enology Extension proposed a plan to host the event in Wooster, and the Ohio Grape Industries Committee (OGIC) approved it. The board also voted to adopt Enofile, a widely used wine competition management software. Both decisions were finalized on January 14, 2026.
Early Preparations: Registration, Categories, and Communication Challenges
Once approved, the first major task was registering with Enofile. Communication delays slowed progress, and setting up our competition categories proved more complex than expected. Our types of categories were not what Enofile typically handles, and I also requested an additional field to quickly identify Ohio-made wines eligible for OQW (Ohio Quality Wine seal). After several rounds of adjustments, the system became workable and clear.
Online registration went smoothly overall, with only a few wineries experiencing issues. If we continue using Enofile in future years, we plan to provide more explicit instructions to streamline the process.
Securing a Venue
Finding a hotel in Wooster that could accommodate our event and accept a temporary F3 permit was another early hurdle. Several hotels declined due to permit restrictions or insufficient event space. Ultimately, the Hilton Garden Inn proved to be the perfect fit, conveniently located across from campus wine storage, just large enough for our needs, and staffed by an incredibly friendly and supportive team. I would gladly host the competition there again.
Selecting Judges
The OGIC board approves a list of judges each year. I added several new names to the list, which the board approved. From that list, I selected 12 judges. When one judge had to withdraw shortly before the event, we secured an alternate recommended by an experienced Ohio Wine Competition judge, an excellent addition who performed exceptionally well.
Record Participation and the Mountain of Wine
Registration closed on May 1, 2026, with 59 wineries submitting 523 entries, a record number. My cooler filled rapidly until there was barely room to walk. At one point I simply stared at the stacks of boxes thinking,“What have I gotten myself into?”
Enofile assigned each wine a four-digit code. We printed labels for bottles and judges’ glasses, then organized the wines into four judging panels, each with two experienced judges and one newer judge. Panels were color-coded to match bottle and glass labels.
Sorting, labeling, and paneling the wines took roughly 50 hours. After separating samples for chemical analysis and boxing wines by panel, everything was stored until transport to the hotel.
Flighting the Wines: A Puzzle of Its Own
At the hotel, we set up four long rows of tables, one per panel, and arranged wines in flight order. While Enofile assisted with flighting, the final organization happened in Excel. This step was surprisingly challenging. Many wines were entered into incorrect categories (for example: Sauvignon Blancs listed under American grape categories, dry wines entered as sweet, Cabernet Francs placed in general dry red classes instead of their varietal class).
In total, I corrected around 128 miscategorized wines before judging began. Unfortunetly, I wasn’t able to catch all of them, but I did my best with the information given. For next year, I plan to simplify and reduce the number of categories to make registration clearer and grouping more intuitive.
Judging Days
Most judges arrived the evening before the competition. Over dinner, we reviewed procedures and prepared for a full day of tasting. Judges used the UC Davis 20-point scale and wrote detailed comments for each wine. After scoring individually, each panel discussed the wines to reach a consensus medal:
-
17–20 points: Gold
-
15–16 points: Silver
-
13–14 points: Bronze
-
12 points: Above-average commercial wine
-
10–11 points: Average wine
-
7–9 points: Below average
-
3–6 points: Poor to very poor
-
1–2 points: Undrinkable
A wine receiving unanimous gold ratings earned a Double Gold. This year, 28 wines achieved that distinction and advanced to Best of Show.
To ensure the integrity of the judging process, all wines were evaluated under strict blind tasting conditions. Judges did not have access to the section of the room where the bottled wines were stored, and at no point were they able to see labels, winery names, or identifying information for any of the samples. Wines were presented only by their assigned codes, allowing judges to focus solely on the sensory characteristics in the glass without influence from branding, reputation, or prior knowledge. The wines were poured and served by our volunteer staff members to maintain anonymity of the wines.
Best of Show
On day two, all Double Gold wines were presented to judges simultaneously. Judges evaluated each wine, discussed them by category, and then voted for their top two wines in each class. If the first-place wine in a category was not Ohio-made (which happened only once this year), the second-place wine received the Best of Ohio award.
A Judge’s Reflection
One judge captured the spirit of this year’s competition beautifully, and I highlighted a major point that was expressed by the judges this year.
“Each panel tasted about 150 wines across two days. And one thing that was clear is, good wine is good. When an exceptional wine comes across the table it demands attention and it's really a delight to experience. We had a huge variety of wines in both style and quality. There were a few heartbreaking wines that I tasted and loved what their potential was but we tasted months too early. It's an interesting thing, scoring the wine in front of me, not the wine I want to be in front of me later this year. Not every wine needs to be thought provoking, but every wine should at least be made with an attentive hand.”
-Tony Jacobson, EnoCraft
My Notes
I just want to say that I had a great time directing the competition this year. It was a learning curve, and I appreciate all of you involved for your patience and understanding this year. I believe future years will be a lot smoother. I wanted to note a few things. A consistent theme noted by judges this year was the number of wines showing signs of “bottle shock,” a temporary condition that can occur after a wine has been recently bottled, transported, or otherwise handled extensively. Bottle shock can mute aromas, flatten flavors, and make wine seem less expressive than intended. In addition, several entries appeared to be simply too young, not yet given sufficient time to integrate and develop in the bottle before evaluation. In both cases, judges were mindful to assess the wine as presented in the glass, while recognizing that some of these wines may evolve significantly over time and show much more favorably with additional aging.
I collected score sheets with any/all judges comments for each wine. I plan to go through these papers and record all notes to provide to each winery along with chemical analyses. If there are questions about medals awarded after you see the notes and the chemical analyses, we can set up times to discuss how to improve your processes. I plan to have all chemical analyses and notes recorded by the beginning of August. Medal results were sent out to the entrants shortly after the competition concluded. I apologize for sending the raw data, and I thank Christy Eckstein for providing the well-formatted version of the results this year. If you have any questions regarding the competition, please feel free to contact me. Thank you!
