Choosing Between Replanting and Salvaging a Hail-Damaged Vineyard
A 12-hectare Shiraz vineyard on own-rooted vines, planted 14 years ago, is hit by hail in late November (flowering to fruit set). Assessment shows 60% of shoots stripped of leaves and bunches destroyed on the western half, while the eastern half has 25% leaf loss and intact bunches. Trunk damage is minimal. The owner has a contract for 80 tonnes and must decide whether to replant the western block, salvage the crop, or do both. Replanting costs $28,000 per hectare and takes four years to return to full production; the current season's salvage value on the eastern half is estimated at $9,000 per hectare.
1. Compare the financial and agronomic case for replanting versus salvaging the western half.
Read the worked answer
Salvaging the western half yields little: with 60% of shoots stripped and bunches destroyed, the retained crop is small and the vines will divert resources into rebuilding canopy. The immediate salvage value is low, but the vines are only 14 years old, own-rooted, and have undamaged trunks, so they retain substantial productive life. Replanting at $28,000/ha costs $336,000 across 12 ha and forfeits four years of production, so it destroys value unless the block is truly unproductive. The agronomic reality is that hail damage to shoots and fruit in late November does not kill vines; they will refoliate and crop again next season. The rational comparison is therefore: salvage what remains this season, protect the vines for next year, and reserve replanting for blocks with trunk or root damage. The eastern half should be managed normally to protect the 80-tonne contract.
2. What management actions would you take in the weeks after the hail, and what evidence would change your decision toward replanting?
Read the worked answer
Post-hail actions: avoid further stress by maintaining irrigation and nutrition to support refoliation, apply a protectant spray to wounded shoots to reduce infection risk (hail wounds are entry points for trunk disease), and remove badly shattered wood. Do not over-crop the eastern half to compensate, as that would weaken vines for next season. Reassess trunk health at pruning: if wood staining or dieback indicates infection entering through hail wounds, the case for replanting strengthens. Evidence that would flip the decision includes significant trunk disease incidence across the western block, poor budburst the following spring, or a contract that cannot be met without the western half's volume. Absent those, stay with salvage and monitor.
3. The contract requires 80 tonnes. Explain how the contract obligation should shape the decision.
Read the worked answer
The contract sets a hard volume floor, so the decision cannot be made on block economics alone. If the eastern half plus salvage from the western half cannot reach 80 tonnes, the shortfall must be sourced elsewhere (purchased fruit or another block) or the contract renegotiated. Replanting the western half guarantees a multi-year shortfall, which is far more damaging than a single poor season. The correct sequence is: estimate achievable tonnage from the eastern half and salvage, quantify the gap, price the gap against the cost of replanting, and only then decide. If the gap can be covered at reasonable cost, salvage is clearly superior. If the gap is unbridgeable and the contract carries penalties, negotiate early rather than replant in haste.