1

A Hopful Future: An Assessment of the Sustainability of Hops in Madison County

Katherine Schultz, Abigail Hahn, Julio Guzman

ENST 390: Community Based Study of Environmental Issues Katherine Schultz, Abigail Hahn, Julio Guzman

Fall 2014 Colgate University

2

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 3

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Sustainability and the Three Pillars .......................................................................................................... 4 Madison County Context ................................................................................................................................. 5 Research question ............................................................................................................................................ 7

Background ............................................................................................................................................. 8 History .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Return of Hops & the Farm Brewing Act .................................................................................................. 8 Climate Change .................................................................................................................................................. 9

Methods .................................................................................................................................................... 9

Results ..................................................................................................................................................... 10 Chase Jackson Interview ............................................................................................................................. 10 Nick Matt Interview....................................................................................................................................... 13 Jim Wrobel Interview ................................................................................................................................... 14 Steve Miller Interview .................................................................................................................................. 14

Discussion .............................................................................................................................................. 15 Economic Feasibility ..................................................................................................................................... 15 Social Feasibility ............................................................................................................................................ 16 Environmental Feasibility .......................................................................................................................... 16

Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 18 Government ..................................................................................................................................................... 18 Consumers ........................................................................................................................................................ 18 Producers ......................................................................................................................................................... 19

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 19

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 20

References ............................................................................................................................................. 20

Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ 21 Appendix I- Steve Miller Interview Questions ..................................................................................... 21 Appendix II- Chase Jackson Interview Questions ............................................................................... 22 Appendix III- Jim Wrobel Interview Questions ................................................................................... 23 Appendix IV- Nick Matt Interview Questions....................................................................................... 23

3

Executive Summary The reintroduction of the hop plant in upstate New York is affecting the social, economic, and environmental aspects of the surrounding communities, otherwise known as the three pillars of sustainable development. Through this project, we set out to assess the growing hop sector in upstate New York with respect to these three pillars. Using what we know about the history of hops, hops production, climate change and sustainability, we sought to determine whether it is possible or not for the growing hops industry in upstate New York to meet the standards of sustainable development. We did this specifically by talking to stakeholders (i.e. local hops farmers and brewers that use the local hops) about their experiences with the growing hops sector. We used our assessment of this to discuss the implications that the reintroduction of hops production raises for Madison County.

We gauged and interpreted the social dimension of sustainable development with respect to hops to mean community interest and accessibility. In general, our interpretations of the various stakeholders’ experiences with locally grown hops show that the resurgence of hops in and around Madison County is meant to affirm and promote the characteristics of a local culture that stems from an historic era of vibrant hops production that flourished over 100 years ago. Furthermore, from listening to the experiences that stakeholders have with using local hops in their products we find that consumers (who we assume to represent at least a part of the local community interest) find locally brewed products favorable.

The feasibility of meeting the standards for sustainable economic growth are clearly and explicitly expressed by the brewers as being contingent on the price of locally grown hops. Specifically, what we found is that it is more economically sustainable currently for microbreweries to purchase and use hops from the Pacific Northwest. This is because the price for locally grown hops in New York State is roughly two and a half times greater than the cost of hops that are not locally sourced. There is, however, room for growth in the hops production sector, which would bring local prices down. We predict that if local hops farms increase their scale of production and the demand for local hops increases, then it will become more feasible to meet the standards for economic sustainability. Growing hops can be an arduous process, and expansion for some hops farmers will require more labor and infrastructure, posing economic difficulties. Thus, we find that for farms to expand sustainably in the economic sense, there needs to be a greater economic incentive. We find that this is likely to occur under the auspices of the Farm Brewery Law, which requires a certain amount of hops and other beer making products to be sourced in New York State.

The relationship between the stakeholders in this temporal period is a friendly one. Thus, brewers are supportive of each other and very trusting of the farmers’ responsibility to provide quality hops. Our interactions with the stakeholders show that brewers are not as concerned about climate change as farmers are. The farmers including a local hops specialist are hopeful that the changing climate will work in their favor. This snapshot into the future of New York State’s climate allows us to be hopeful for a resurgence of hops production in the area. Thus, the environmental sustainability of hops production rests not solely on the conditions of the new environment but also on the ability of farmers to combat increased weeds and pest using methods that are not harmful to the local ecosystem and environment as a whole.

4

Introduction

Our project seeks to address the sustainability of hops in upstate New York by looking at the history of hops in the region and the present state of hops production in order to gauge what the future of hops might look like for Madison County and upstate New York in general. We rely on the knowledge and experiences of the local stakeholders to inform our analysis of the economic, social, and environmental implications that the renewed interest of hops will have on the region. Specifically, we interview New York State hops specialist Steve Miller, farmers and manufacturers at Foothill Farms and Wrobel Farms, and we speak to local brewers at Good Nature Brewery in Hamilton, NY, and Saranac Brewery in Utica, NY.

Sustainability and the Three Pillars

Sustainability is a concept that infiltrates the social, economic, and environmental aspects of our lives. More to the point, sustainability acknowledges the problem with the status quo (i.e. the perpetuation of environmental degradation as a result of current societal systems and processes) and prepares to confront it accordingly. This revolutionary character of sustainability becomes most apparent within the framework of sustainable development. Sustainable development, however, does not immediately connote radical change. Only by taking its definition apart and assessing sustainable development in light of climate change can we highlight the radical undertone associated with sustainability, while at the same time identifying its strengths and weaknesses with regard to its practical implementation. Wolfgang Frey (2013) defines sustainable development as “development that is at once ecologically, economically, and socially sustainable, with the intent of meeting our present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (p. 47-48). The concept of sustainable development follows the understanding that the environment does not exist as a sphere separate from human actions, ambitions, or needs (Kates et al., 2005, p.10). Rather, the capacity to understand the concepts behind sustainable development derives from the ability to move beyond the national, political, economic, ideological, racial, ethnic, and gender borders that fragment and divide us (Thiele, 2013, p. 39). For example, pollution does not stop at national borders and climate change cannot be isolated to particular countries or continents. Given the substantial amount of greenhouse gases, the increase in the average global temperature, and the slowly rising sea level, we are on a trajectory towards abrupt environmental variances with extremely detrimental effects on all people in all places around the world.

Sustainable development challenges that trajectory and works towards altering it. By itself, the concept of sustainable development is vague and fails to address the temporal framework that it implies. For example, what constitutes the “future” and what is considered a “need”? Such ambiguity neglects real substance and risks the interpretation of sustainable development in purely economic terms (Worster 1993). The ambiguity of the definition, however, can be advantageous for small-scale implementation. Namely, it serves as a working guideline that allows for sustainable development to take on different forms in different communities, while ultimately upholding its commitment to sustaining the

5

ecological, economic, and social dimensions of society. These three dimensions are often referred to as the three pillars of sustainable development. The emphasis on small-scale development is important because every community holds different values and will pursue and adapt to the principles of sustainable development differently (Frey 2013). Thus, this definition of sustainable development is viable only if individuals buy into it and hold each other accountable for the radical restructuring of society, moving away from the idea that successful human progress is measured solely by economic growth (Worster 1993).

Sustainable development must be operationalized in order for it to be successfully implemented in any community. That is, any ambiguities that might hinder its comprehension must be addressed, allowing stakeholders to have consensual knowledge of the issues and a consensual objective for the stakeholders to pursue. Thus, it requires the stakeholders to identify and balance the three pillars of sustainability, relative to the needs and context of their community. In the case of our research project, this approach is focused on a specific sector of society: what are the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of society that need to be balanced for the hops sector in upstate New York to develop sustainably? The answer to this question opens up a framework from which to assess the future of hops in Madison County.

As mentioned earlier, we interpret the social dimension to mean community interest and accessibility. The economic dimension more explicitly describes the ability of local breweries to afford hops and make a profit from them as well as allowing farmers to afford production, labor, and infrastructure costs. The environmental dimension refers to the ability of farmers to combat increased weeds and pest using methods that are not harmful to the local ecosystem and the environment as a whole. For the reemergence of hops to develop sustainably, the well-being and advancement of any one of these individual dimensions must be made in conjunction with the others.

Madison County Context

How is sustainable development relevant to Madison County? Today, sustainable development is relevant everywhere, but it is especially relevant in the midst of impactful change. For example, the resurgence of hops in Madison County and in the greater central New York area comes at a crucial point in time when we have the resources to reintroduce hops sustainably. That is, increased hops production is affecting the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of society and it is important that any further development is done in light of climate change. Climate change, after all, has the potential to compromise the future of the human population, affecting the environmental, economic, and social dimensions that sustainable development seeks to balance.

The climate is changing on a global scale and New York State is certainly not an exception. The extent to which climate change will impact New York State depends on a multitude of factors. We must understand how the climate will change, identify the potential vulnerabilities caused by the changing climate, assess the various risks associated with those vulnerabilities and then ultimately develop adaptation strategies to minimize risks (Rosenzweig, 2011, p. 6). This process can be applied to any particular region or industry on a macro level.

The hops sector is interesting because demand is growing as a result of the increase in craft breweries, despite there being no large scale hops production in Madison County.

6

Therefore we are focusing less on the adaptive capacity of the current hops market but focusing more on the capacity of room for sustainable growth within the industry. Ultimately we hope to answer the question of whether or not local demand can encourage sustainable growth of the hops industry in Madison County despite the changing climate. In order to do this, however, we must contextualize hops with its geographical and environmental surroundings: how will climate change affect the region and what does this mean for hops production? Thus, we discuss the general impact of climate change on the region, link it to rural Madison County, and ultimately relate its effects to the growth of hops.

Madison County can be identified as a rural community that has historically been dependent on agriculture. The changing climate places enormous pressure on agricultural resources and threatens the success of local farming practices. The vulnerability of rural communities makes it even more important to help grow the knowledge base of how the community can accurately adapt and mitigate the negative impacts of climate change (Hales, 2014, p. 336). In order to further the concept of sustainability in these communities we need to work to minimize trade offs and maximize the benefits by adapting agriculture systems to limit the impacts of climate change. According to Hatfield (2014), “increased innovation will be needed to ensure that the rate of adaptation of agriculture and the associated socioeconomic system can keep pace with climate change” (p.151). The socioeconomic system he is referring to is rooted in rural communities and their access to resources that sustain their livelihoods. More specifically, we are focusing on how these vulnerabilities are related to hops and the stakeholders who depend on hops for their livelihoods--ultimately helping us gauge the viability of the sustainable development of the hops sector.

Climate change poses a major threat to local agriculture and rural communities because of the complex role that agriculture plays on the social, economic, and environmental scales. Rural communities are especially dependent upon natural resources for their livelihoods and social structures. With physical isolation, limited economic diversity, and higher poverty rates, the projected impacts on crop production will have a profound effect on their livelihood. If rural communities are to respond adequately to future climate changes, risk and vulnerability assessment is vital, along with the prioritization and coordination of projects, and deploying information-sharing and decision support tools (Hales et al., 340). Education and awareness are fundamental to the successful adaptation to future climatic changes. Some current strategies include technological advancements, expansion of irrigated acreage, regional shift in crop acreage and crop species, and other adjustments in inputs and outputs to changing climate patterns (Hatfield et al., 151). Researching the sustainability of certain crops, soil types, and understanding the variability of climate patterns on both short term and long term scales are fundamental for the future of climatic change.

Agriculture is a particularly vulnerable system when it comes to climate change (Hatfield, et al., 2013). According to Solecki et al (2011), a particularly relevant stress to sustainable development caused by climate change is the effect it will have on the adaptive capacity of the agricultural sector to respond to seasonal variations. Accordingly, for the agricultural sector to sustainably develop under the threat of climate change, it must have resources and a high adaptive capacity. Resources, in this context, are the means for the stakeholders to change farming methods and take risks. The adaptive capacity of the

7

farmer will also be reliant upon the farmer’s access to means for innovation and support from the community it serves. Community support is critical for the agriculture sector, especially in rural areas, to overcome the challenges of climate change. This is because there are a lot of stakeholders involved with the agriculture sector. Specifically, climate change will challenge food security for everyone (Solecki et al. 2011).

Since the social and economic dimensions related to hops are contingent on the production of hops and hops will be affected by the seasonal variations described above, we pay particular attention to how climate change will impact hop growth. Specifically, we consider how the hops plant will respond to climate change and use this to inform our conclusions about the future of hops in Madison County. For example, since the 1950s, chilling hours in some regions have been 30% lower. As our atmospheric carbon dioxide levels continue to rise along with global average temperatures, we can expect to see a continued decrease of chilling hours by 60% in the next 40 years. (Hatfield et al., 2014, 156). What does this mean for hops production? With increases in night-time temperatures, the flowering ability of plants, including hops, prior to fruit production has the ability to be greatly affected. Specifically, day length, chill temperatures, dormancy periods, and weather conditions play a vital role in the survival of hops plants. Hops need at least two months of dormancy prior to growth in the end of spring, early summer. Since the hop flower is fragile, hail and wind can greatly damage a crop. Furthermore, hops are extremely susceptible to disease, as can be seen in the past, but have been able to flourish in the Pacific Northwest because of its altitude and dry climate, which is less prone to disease, fungi, and pests. Therefore a major concern with climate change is the increased humidity that allows for pests and diseases to survive and ruin yields. The next 5-10 years of hop production is hopeful because hop growth in this region will be able to withstand increases in climate variability. Hops should be able to survive increases in air temperature and soil temperature in the near future and the warming could help with reduced frosts. It is, however, important to remember that all three pillars are dynamic and so is the environment. Therefore, as climate continues to change, the ability to harvest and produce hops will need to be evaluated with a critical lens, and addressed from the lens of sustainable development.

Research question

Our focus is on the agriculture industry in Madison County, specifically hops. Our goal is to determine the adaptive capacity of the hops industry in Madison County using the experiences and knowledge of the relevant stakeholders in the industry to determine if hop farming is a viable option for business, as well as assessing whether or not the growing conditions for hops are compatible with the changing climate.

8

Background

History

Hops are the female flowers of the hop plant, humulus lupulus. The hop plant is a climbing, herbaceous perennial, usually trained to grow up trellises made from strings or wires in a field called a hop yard. Hops are used for various purposes in beverages and other products. They are used primarily as a flavoring and stability agent in beer, to which they impart a bitter, tangy flavor. Farmers around the world grow many different varieties of hops, with different types being used for particular styles of beer.

In the 1880s New York produced over 21 million pounds of dried hops, and there were about 40,000 acres used to produce these hops. As early as 1808, hops were being grown commercially in the Chenango Valley (Darlington 1984). The hops sector was so successful that for sixty years the state of New York produced more hops than any other state in the country (Darlington 1984). Unfortunately, disease pressure from downy mildew and powdery mildew along with aphids, spiders, and mites made production difficult and not cost effective. Additionally, New York State “began to lose its prominence in hop farming to the West Coast” because the West Coast proved to have higher yields, more land units, modern facilities, and cheaper labor (Darlington 1984, p. 29). As a result, industry started to move to the mid-west and the Pacific Northwest away from the disease pressure. By 1960, hop yards were gone (Darlington 1984, p. 29). It has been over a hundred years since New York has seen a widespread thriving hops industry, but a rising trend in local farm breweries suggests that this could change sooner than later.

Return of Hops & the Farm Brewing Act New York is certainly not a front runner in the hops industry. In 2011, 100% of commercial hop production came out of the Pacific Northwest with 78% from Washington, 14.5% from Oregon, and 7.5% from Idaho (Baur, 2013). However, in the past 10 years hop production has increased exponentially in New York State, and will continue to expand due to the Farm Brewing Law implemented in 2013. Governor Andrew Cuomo saw the economic potential of bringing hops back to New York and implemented the Farm Brewing Act in 2012. The law works to incentivize the production of hops and other locally grown brewing products in the region. “The legislation signed today demonstrates that the New York is truly working for small business, as this law will allow breweries and wineries the opportunity to invest in new opportunities and expand their operations,” Governor Cuomo said in July 2012. The law was modeled after the “Farm Winery Act” from 1976, which resulted in growth in wine production in the state, creating over 261 farm wineries and tripling the number of total wineries in the state. Since its implementation, central New York is already seeing benefits in the form of Harvest Moon Cidery, Henneberg Tavern, Foothill Farms, Empire Brewing Company, and Good Nature Brewing. Currently, the legislation requires that 20 percent of the hops and 20 percent of all other ingredients must be grown or produced within the state of New York. By 2018, no less than 60 percent of the hops and 60 percent of all other ingredients must be local. By 2024, 90 percent of ingredients must be sourced locally. In the past four years

9

alone, hop acreage has increased from less than 50 acres to over 130 acres. Additionally, in this timeframe, the number of craft breweries has increased from just over 30 to about 130 in New York State. This increase is due to an interest in wet and fresh hops, which must be sourced locally for freshness, an upsurge in interest in higher quality beer, and a need for more variety in the types and tastes of beer (Baur, 2013).

Climate Change Climate change research surrounding hops production and yield is limited. There is one relevant published study in 2009 that researched the decline in quality of Saaz hops in the Czech Republic as temperatures continue to increase. As discussed earlier, climate change is likely to challenge existing agricultural systems due to increased climate variability and extreme weather events that will impact crop production and agricultural profitability. The stimulations in their research found that hops will be particularly vulnerable to a change in climate. Even with the modest warming that has occurred thus far, yields have already stagnated and quality has declined. An increase in air temperature results in an earlier onset of hop phonological phases and a shortening of the vegetation period. They modeled climate change with stimulation and found that further climate change could decrease yields from 7-10% and decreased a-acid content up to 13-32% (Mozny, 2013, p. 913). A-acid is a major determinant of quality in the product that brewers want, hence why research has been focused on finding a strain with high a-acid and ultimately high quality. The context is important because the study was conducted in the Czech Republic, where hops are grown in a small region making it more vulnerable than if the crop were to be planted in more areas with varying climates. Ultimately they found that climate change might lead to a regionalization of hop production to limit vulnerability, similar to what will be seen in Madison County and New York over the next few years. It is important to note that these results were based on a stimulation of what is to come and not so much what has already happened, this leaves room for error in the predicted changes because the future climate is unpredictable.

Methods

We deemed the most relevant stakeholders associated to the resurgence of hops production in upstate New York to be the hops farmers, the brewers that use locally grown hops, and Steve Miller from the Cornell Cooperative who is helping with the return of hops in the area. The relevant stakeholders all have perspectives on the three pillars of sustainability. Their insights are important as they provide a means by which to gauge the feasibility of balancing the three dimensions of sustainable development with regards to hops production in upstate New York. Our methods included meeting with all those involved in the hops industry ranging from the farmers, to the brewers to the specialists. We focused our attention on local farmers because they are the ones pioneering the return of hops. We consulted Good Nature because they are a small local craft brewery who are required to source some ingredients locally, they are very important in the future because craft breweries like them

10

are driving the demand for local hops. Steve Miller, a hops specialist, was essential to speak to because he knows a lot about the industry as a whole, including the West Coast. So while a lot of our research has been local, he encouraged us to broaden our scale to better understand Madison County. This led us to set up a meeting with Saranac Brewery, a large brewery that does not source very much locally. They have a relationship with Mr. Wrobel but for the most part buy their hops from the West Coast because it is cheap and the product is consistent and of good quality. Though large breweries are not relevant stakeholders today they could be in the future if the scale of hops increases enough for them to source locally, hence why they are important to include in our long-term plan. The environmental pillar dimension is expressed through our conversations with a farmer, who in this case is represented by Jim Wrobel of Wrobel Farms from Bridgewater, NY. Our time with him provided, as we had hoped, some good insight into how climate change has and will impact hops growth. Additionally, we were also able to learn about the scale of hops production that various farmers are engaging in. As of now there are less than 200 acres of hops in the state and according to Steve Miller, from the Cornell Cooperative, the state could potentially support over 1,000 acres. Such an increase in the sector will challenge farmers to grow the industry in coordination with the other stakeholders. This brings us to the economic pillar because this much growth needs investment and could potentially bring down costs for processing hops making it more profitable. We also visited and interviewed the woman who works in the Foothill Farms Country Store in order to gain a better understanding of the home-brewing products and other hops related products they sell. For example, Foothill farms produces hops mustard and hops lemonade along with selling pelletized hops that they create and harvest using their own picking machinery. The owner of Foothill farms, Larry Fisher, built his own Wolff harvesting machine.

The final pillar, the social pillar, is demonstrated by our interview with Good Nature and Saranac Brewery. Craft breweries would greatly benefit from the increase in local hops production because they are required to source a certain percentage of ingredients locally, and that number is expected to increase up to 90 percent. As production increases and infrastructure surrounding hops production increases local breweries can source their ingredients closer and for cheaper. It is clear that all three of these pillars overlap because the stakeholders represent more than one.

Results

Chase Jackson Interview We spoke with Chase Jackson who is a brewery representative for Good Nature Brewery in order to get a better understanding of the craft brewery landscape in New York. As a brewery representative he is responsible for managing wholesale accounts and bars with good nature beer on tap besides their local tap room. They distribute as far North as Lake Placid down to Binghamton and also in Syracuse. He also helps plan tap takeovers at other bars in the area, farmers market events, and other tasks around the bar and taproom. Good Nature is currently at production capacity for their equipment so right now they are focusing on which beers sell best and make the most money. By working to maximize their

11

revenue with existing equipment they can focus on potential expansion in the future. They are currently working to secure funding and necessary permits in order to expand because there is enough demand and money to be made. The craft brewing industry grew about 20 percent last year and Good Nature has been fortunate enough to hit the same if not better numbers this year compared to last year. New York craft breweries have grown slightly more than the 20 percent and has kept pace with places such as Boulder, San Diego, San Francisco, and other “craft beer meccas” where breweries are found on almost every block. New York has 165 breweries total so the numbers are not up to par with others yet, however there is ample room for growth in the industry. Growth can occur in increased number of craft breweries but also already existing breweries expanding operations. The market in New York is fairly friendly because everyone is still making money and there is still more money to be made. This is good news for craft breweries in comparison to macro breweries such as Budweiser who saw sales decrease about 2 percent last year. Also in relation to hops, macro breweries use far less hops in their beer as compared to ndia Pale Ales (IPAs) and other craft brews. Good Nature specifically uses hops a lot in its beer, especially in its IPAs. What is on tap changes through the seasons but at any time they could have over five IPAs on tap. IPAs have 19% of the craft beer market share, which allows hops varieties oils to be showcased in the final product. The rising popularity of craft beer and specifically IPAs has definitely promoted the growth of hops and will continue to do so. Good Nature has to follow the Farm Brewing act so 20 percent of all ingredients including hops must be sources locally and that number will continue to grow until 90 percent. They currently source about 20-40 percent of hops locally from Mosher farms just under three miles away, Foothills Farm, and Wrobel Farms. They try to source as much as they can locally but they face an issue with price and what types are available locally. They pay over three times more per pound for local hops than if the hops were being purchased from the Pacific Northwest. Also, if local competitors are using cheaper ingredients that aren’t local and putting out good quality beer then Good Nature is at a competitive disadvantage. The issue with local hops is the lack of processing infrastructure when compared to out West where hops is a huge cash crop business with 10 million dollar high tech facilities that can process fresh hops right after they have been picked. New York State is lacking access to central processing facilities. There is one in Buffalo and Oneonta and some farmers use their own techniques (as seen at Foothills Farm). There is risk associated with farmers using their own processing equipment and lack of proper processing infrastructure because if the hops are not processed correctly, the aroma characteristics that give IPAs flavor can be lost. Good Nature feels that the local hops processing infrastructure is not up to scale yet but it can be. They also feel that the farming acreage is not up to scale, farmers in New York tend to plant an acre or two of hops and “test the water” as compared to producing on a larger scale. Bigger business investment would be needed to increase acreage and produce a quality product that brewers are looking for. Consistency is an issue with local hops, because of Good Nature’s size they have been able to get the amount they need for a year but once they expand they need higher volumes of the same type of hops in order to create a consistent product. Currently, their IPA changes every two months depending on the availability of ingredients so the batches are different but customers want a form of consistency.

12

Good Nature is connected to their farmers but has taken the stance of “let the farmers farm and the brewers brew” as some breweries have expanded to begin growing their own hops and barley. They usually have a formal or informal agreement with farmers agreeing on a certain amount of hops at the beginning of the season so there is some sense of security. They are not on the farms everyday with the farmers but they do pay attention to weather and check out harvests at times. They have also considered doing harvest parties, similar to Wrobel Farms, because it is labor intensive to pick hops so if they can turn it into a community experience that connects people to their beer it could save labor costs. He touched briefly on the issue of weather and the quality of a hop yield. Since they have only been around for about three and a half years they have not experienced any issue with local quality but it could happen in the future. Heavy rain or warmer weather could potentially damage a crop along with blight or pests, however farmers are able to get crop insurance just in case anything detrimental happens to their yield. There is some room for lower quality hops in the market because if the hops do not have the aroma they want in a beer, the hops can be used on the boil side where the aromas do not really matter. The high temperature in the boiling process extracts the bittering chemicals and the oil evaporates out so if a batch is not processed well or not high quality, it is not wasted. We then directed our questions towards the business side of things. We asked if a college town is ideal for the venture of a craft brewery. They mentioned that the college town aspect of Hamilton indirectly helps the brewery succeed because about 75% of the students are under 21. Craft breweries like Good Nature provide an interesting social aspect because they promote a mature drinking culture without binge drinking which is an issue on college campuses. The college supports Hamilton as a whole and brings money into the town, which improves the local economy as compared to a town like Sherburne who doesn’t have a college like Colgate close by. So the college town helps business indirectly by allowing them to operate in a small town with a stable economy. They also mentioned that Madison County in general is a good location for a craft brewery because it was a hop-growing region in the past so there’s a historical significance that has made it easy to create relationships in the community. The historical aspect is also good for marketing and business, so they hope to see a lot more hops being grown nearby within the next ten years. Marketing is a critical component of their business because of the appreciation for local products. They brewed a batch of Bavarian Dream that was made with 100% local ingredients, however the beer contained a little amount of hops and more wheat and barley. Looking across the food and beverage industry in New York there has definitely been a trend towards healthier local options. The whole idea of “think New York, drink New York” along with the implementation of the farm brewing act really shows how the industry can continue to grow because of social trends reinforced by government policy. However, sourcing local is expensive so they need to find balance between the price people are willing to pay but still generate revenue. There is a social value in the local brand so they are able to charge more for certain beer but there is a limit because they could be all local and charge three times the amount but it would not be smart for their business model especially at their current size. However, once they expand their brewing facility and increase production the beer will be cheaper to make because of economies of scale. In conclusion, Good Nature provided us with a positive outlook on the craft brewing landscape in New York State. Increased interest in IPAs and the flavors hops add to beer

13

will continue to support the growth of the hop industry. However, there are some varieties that aren’t grown in New York, which can limit breweries production. Lack of infrastructure as compared to the Pacific Northwest also limits local production. If New York wants to become a frontrunner in the industry, they need to introduce a hop union as seen out West. The hop union buys all of the farmers’ hops and acts as a middleman that processes all of the hops. Farmers can grow hops and harvest them and then the hop union can flip and sell them, then they don’t have to deal with finding their own buyers because there is a central facility to distribute. This model has allowed a lot of money to be generated in the industry that has then been used to research and create new strains of hops that are more flavorful and resistant to disease. Steve Miller at the Cornell Cooperative also researches hops strains for New York, but not at the same scale, therefore it is hard for small breweries like Good Nature to compete with trends and new products that they might not have access too. The introduction of a middleman to New York State may be beneficial to the industry but is it feasible? Farm breweries want to stay local and can be turned off by the idea of a company coming in. However, from a business standpoint it is expensive to buy directly and a middle man could bring prices way down and promote a lot of growth which is helpful for the breweries as they begin to need to source more and more ingredients locally. A middleman would also bring a central processing facility to New York which would remove the pressure for individual farmers to buy the expensive equipment or bring harvests elsewhere to be processed. Since the brewery is not directly connected to the farming of the hops they used they mentioned only a little about climate change concerns in the future. As of now they have been able to get what the need and at most 30 percent of a harvest might be lost to blight or bad weather, never 100 percent. When hops also left the area in the past it was due to pests and today there are far more pesticides and ways to limit the impacts of disease pressure.

Nick Matt Interview

We spoke to Nick Matt, CEO of Saranac Brewery, on two occasions to establish an understanding of the perspective of hops growth in the county from the viewpoint of a large brewery. Saranac is a large family run brewery in Utica, New York. Since its establishment in the 1850s, the Matt family has been sourcing a small percentage of their hops locally. But, due to their size, they do not have to follow the Farm Brewing Act. Today, Saranac sources a small portion of their hops locally from Wrobel Farm. For the past few summers, Saranac and Wrobel farms have held “Saranac Hop Harvest” and have local members of the community come to Wrobel farms to pick hops for the New York State Wet Hop IPA beer.

According to Matt, it is not economically feasible for them to source a larger percentage of their hops from local farms. New York hops fetch prices around $12 to $18 per pound versus hops grown in the Pacific Northwest and internationally, which go for $7 to $13 per pound (Angel, 2014). Matt believes that if the proper investment occurs and hops production increases, there could potentially be a market for local hops outside of craft breweries. The appeal of hops from the Pacific Northwest and internationally is due not only to the low prices, but also the consistent quality product. However if New York

14

increases their hops acreage and production, large breweries might also begin to drive even more demand.

Jim Wrobel Interview We visited Wrobel Farms and had the opportunity to learn more about the farming aspect of the hops industry from Jim Wrobel, Colgate grad and Colgate parent. He provided us with insights on the sustainability and future of the hops industry from a unique perspective. Mr. Wrobel’s family has owned and operated his farm since the beginning of the hops movement in Madison County. Despite the downturn of the industry in the 1900s, the Wrobel’s continued to let the plants grow free, and it was not until recently that Mr. Wrobel decided to grow hops on a half an acre of land as a hobby. Wrobel has been provided with the special relationship with Saranac and Good Nature Brewery, mentioned above, and is able to support and sustain his small hobby by selling fresh and dried hops. During our interview with him, he spoke of the time consuming nature of growing hops, and the sensitivity of the plant. Wrobel talked about the need for the proper airflow, soil, and temperature for the ideal growth of hops. Wrobel told us he spent hours every night tending to his hops, making sure they were free of spider mites, downy and powdery mildew. Additionally, he spent countless hours altering the pH of his soil and plants in an effort to train his hops to become more resistant to pests and mildew in the future. Wrobel’s passion for hops is a hobby that he is extremely enthusiastic about. He made it clear that the nature of growing hops is a difficult field to become introduced to, and warns those thinking about growing that it takes a lot of work, energy, and commitment. Due to the humidity of the area, hops need the proper amount of air circulation, loamy soil, and abundance of water. Hops need to be tended to, and according to Wrobel will not grow free of pests without the proper care and time.

Steve Miller Interview New York State’s first hops specialist, Steve Miller, took the time to meet with us to discuss the current status of hops production in the greater Madison County region and what he thinks the future of hops production looks like for New York. Miller notes resurgence in the hops industry, saying that only four years ago there was no hops program. Today, he said, there are 250 acres producing hops in the state. Specifically, there are about 50 acres of hops production in New England, about 20 in Madison County, and hundreds of varieties being grown. Miller says that the dry climate and shortage of water for irrigation out west, in states like Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, has partly encouraged the reintroduction of hops in the northeast, including Madison County. Out west, he says, there is high yield but not so much the aroma and flavors that craft brewers are interested in, giving the northeast the upper hand. Furthermore, as the climate changes and with the potential for the climate in the west to get drier, there may be a window of opportunity for hops production to flourish in the northeast, especially if the changing climate works in its favor. Miller is optimistic that the changing will work in its favor and extend the growing season. Furthermore, Miller mentioned that it would be difficult for hops farmers to grow organic hops and that there is not much of an incentive for farmers to be organic because of

15

the significantly lower yield with the absence of nitrogen fertilizers. Additionally, Miller notes that it is most popular to market beer as being a product of New York State with the 100 percent New York State label. He also thinks that there is potential for hops production growth if demand from micro-breweries increases. He thinks that anywhere from 500-1000 acres can be supported for hops production.

Discussion

Economic Feasibility As theorized by Theis (2012), sustainability is the overlap between the three pillars, economic, social, and environmental. The three main components must intersect to find a bearable, viable, and equitable end result (p. 7). Our interviews covered all three pillars and we broke down the sustainability of hops production in Madison County into the three pillars for our discussion on the future of hops. In order to ensure success of the industry we need to make sure all three pillars interests are expressed and respected. In regards to the economic feasibility of hops production growth, there are a multitude of relevant factors. The most pressing is the capital intensity of the industry. Chase Jackson spoke a lot about the lack of infrastructure and large scale hops production in Madison County; however, the growth is feasible with the proper investment. In order to compete with West Coast prices, local hops costs must be driven down, which can be done through introducing a central processing facility and a middleman type structure to connect farmers to the brewers. The Farm Brewing Act can only work if local prices decrease because small breweries cannot afford to pay high prices for 90 percent of their ingredients. “We’re paying almost double what we would out west,” says Good Nature’s Matt Whalen. “But we’re proud to do it.” The microbrewery has purchased more than 2,000 pounds of locally grown hops in 2013. In order to keep this relationship and increase local purchases, prices must be competitive not just locally but nationally because if the local ingredients are not a viable or are too expensive, craft breweries can buy their ingredients elsewhere. The Farm Brewing Act has been greatly beneficial to craft breweries because breweries do not need an additional permit to serve beer by the glass, which has the highest return in terms of sales. The increased profit margin for Good Nature has allowed them to start paying themselves and creates new jobs. After just 90 days of operation the brewery grew from two barrels to seven. Good Nature is a strong example of the business Andrew Cuomo wanted to help when implementing the Farm Brewing Act. However, it is all not good news surrounding the act, Whalen of Good Nature mentioned that 60 percent by 2018 is just not doable at this point because of the high costs of local goods, hence why it is important that prices go down. Steve Miller also spoke to the need for increased scale of production that could drive prices down. Right now there are 130 acres of hops in New York State and that has the potential to double by the end of 2014. Though it is unlikely that Madison County will regain its “former crown”, there could be up to 250 acres fairly soon. This projection continues to upwards of 500 acres potentially. However, the time farm is tricky because it takes three to four years in this area to get a full crop. The three to four year start up phase for farms could potentially deter them from

16

entering the market. The price of entering the market is also very expensive because of the infrastructure. The trellises are hard to build and labor intensive, it takes about $12,000 in initial investment per acre and a wolf harvester costs upwards of $30,000. In regards to the economic feasibility on the farmer’s side of things, they would also benefit from a central processing facility and lower costs of production. However, the future is still hopeful because the capital investment and risk can be dispersed among stakeholders if farmers and brewers work together with the help of a hop alliance system similar to the West Coast. Government regulations could potential also limit the burden of the high costs by providing subsidies for farmers who enter the market and help build a central processing facility so that the Farm Brewing Act can be as successful as it was planned to be.

Social Feasibility Governor Cuomo connects the Farm Brewery Law to the social and economic pillars of sustainability when he says, “In addition to producing some of the finest beer in the world, New York’s craft breweries are creating jobs, supporting our state’s farmers and hops growers, as well as bringing in tourism dollars in local communities across New York” (“Farm Brewery,” 2014). It’s pretty clear how his statement is showing of a thriving environmental dimension. The social dimension is what drives the economic success. That is, community and tourist interest and accessibility to local hop products define our social pillar. The rising trend in farm breweries demonstrates a receptive relationship between the community and state government. This is likely to lead to a socially and economically stable system of hops yards, breweries, and consumers, especially because of the increasing demand for local products. Additionally, programs like the Cornell Cooperative Extension and the Northeast Hop Alliance provide the resources for starting hop farmers. Specifically, the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Madison County states, “the hops program works to enhance the cultural heritage of hops production through education and research” (“Hops Program,” 2014). Their commitment to fostering a sustainable community of hops farmers and breweries is seen in their recent hire of New York States first hops specialist Steve Miller. Miller affirms the future of local farm breweries for the region, saying that among the best marketing for beers in New York is the 100 percent New York grown label. With the growing trend of New York grown pride, it is likely that the social dimension will thrive.

Environmental Feasibility

Climate change poses a major threat to local agriculture and rural communities because of the complex role agriculture plays on social, economic, and environmental scales. Rural communities are especially dependent upon natural resources for their livelihoods and social structures. Hops are extremely susceptible to disease and require proper irrigation, specific altitude, and suitable drainage. When looking at agricultural sustainability, it is important to also understand that plant responses to climate change are

17

dictated by complex interactions among carbon dioxide (CO2), temperature, solar radiation, and precipitation.

According to hop expert, Steve Miller, from the Cornell Cooperative, hops have been able to flourish in the Pacific Northwest because of its altitude and dry climate. As a result, the hop plants are less susceptible to disease, fungi, and pests. In New York, which also has an optimal latitude, between 36-45 degrees, hops plants are able to flourish and will continue to survive, but unfortunately are more at risk due to the moistness/humidity of the area. Due to the humidity, pests such as the two-spotted spider mite, powdery mildew, and downy mildew, are a huge risk for the sustainability of the hops plant. Miller additionally explained that day length, chill temperatures, dormancy periods, and weather conditions play a vital role in the survival of hops plants. Hops need at least two months of dormancy prior to growth in the end of spring, early summer. He emphasized the impact hail and wind damage could have on growth due to the fragility of the hops flowers. Hops plants can easily be knocked over by wind, and the flowers and the cones are extremely susceptible to damage. Additionally, hops require a lot of nitrogen, potassium, and phosphates, a specific pH, and a particular amount of drainage and till. All of these factors contribute to the overall health and sustainability of hops. Water, pH, and the nutrients can be controlled by proper irrigation and fertilization, but unfortunately, old soils with clay do not drain well and are not loamy enough for growth.

Climate conditions play a fundamental role in the health and productivity of the most vital aspect of agriculture, soil. Increases in climate variability will have a profound impact on the soil temperature, soil water content and availability, and the amount of organic matter input from plants. Not only this, but this critical component of agricultural systems is also impacted by the amount, distribution, and intensity of precipitation. The erosive power of rainfall affects the compaction, acidification, salinization, and net loss of organic matter within soils. In New York State we are at an advantage due to rockier soil types for proper drainage, we have access to water for irrigation, and have land that is in direct sunlight and is flat or has a gentle slope with good air circulation. According to Burgess (1964) “the hop is a hardy plant and, provided that it is growing in a reasonably good soil which is not subject to waterlogging, it can tolerate quite a wide range of climate” (p. 66). Specifically, the ideal mean summer temperature for hops is 60°-65°F (Burgess 1964). Furthermore, Burgess (1964) attributes successful hop production in the United States’ Western states of California, Oregon, and Washington to prolonged sunlight, including a minimum 12 inches supply of rainfall for the growing season that lasts from March to August. New York State is expected to face temperature increases between 1.8°F-5.4°F, a decrease in cold days, and increased precipitation events (Hatfield 2014; Rozenweig et al 2011). Thus, vulnerability to climate change is being assessed purely by the effects will have on the growing process of hops.

The environmental pillar of sustainable development rests on the challenges that hops farmers will face adapting to new growing conditions. According to Miller, the next 5-10 years of hop production is “hopful” because hop growth in this region will be able to sustain increases in climate variability. He strongly believes that hops will be able to survive increases in air temperature and soil temperature in the near future and the warming could help with reduced frosts. But, with physical isolation, limited economic diversity, and higher poverty rates, the projected impacts on crop production will have a profound effect on the livelihood of hops farmers in rural Upstate NY. Researching the

18

sustainability of pest resistant hops, soil types, and understanding the variability of climate patterns on both short term and long term scales are fundamental for the future of climatic change.

Recommendations

Government There has already been active involvement by the government in New York State to promote the hops industry in Madison County. Most obviously through the Farm Brewing Act, which if it goes according to planned there will need to large increases in hop acreage over the next ten years. The government should continue to make sure this act is followed and enforce the strict percentages for locally sourced ingredients. But that is not enough because if ingredients are not available locally then the breweries can source elsewhere and not follow the law, therefore the government should help make sure there is ample supply. They can do this by providing subsidies to those interested in entering the industry because the initial start up costs are high and farmers will only enter if they see a profit to be made. The New York State brewers association has done a good job at connecting farmers with breweries who will buy their product. This communication is important because farmers will not grow hops if no one will buy them. This is what makes the West Coast hop industry structure so desirable, the hop alliance. The introduction of a middleman to New York State that would buy and process all the hops from farmers then sell to brewers would be greatly beneficial for the industry. Good Nature Brewery has expressed interest in this because it would bring costs down a lot. The government can work to make this business venture more feasible and successful or it could be left to a private investor. The introduction of such a valuable stakeholder to New York State in the hops industry could help distribute the risk associated with the growth of the industry. The middleman would make it easier for the brewers and farmers to expand by making it cheaper for them to produce and sell hops. The extra funds generated could also be used to fund research surrounding hops strains and combating the issues that arise from the changing climate. A central processing facility eliminates the issue of the feedback loop situation where breweries don’t want to enter the market without local products but farmers don’t want to enter the market without breweries to buy their product.

Consumers In order for the hops industry to continue to grow and flourish, there must be involvement on a consumer level. Members of Madison County must support their local breweries through the drinking of beer, hosting local events, and promoting the trend of sourcing local. Additionally, they can play a role through the involvement in a Community Supported Agriculture venture with hops. Currently, there is a program that is called CSB (Community Supported Breweries) that helps breweries by having members of the community pay up front for growlers, but it does not incorporate the picking or production of hops. As a group, we thought it would be interesting to create a concept like CSBs, but

19

consumers can also play a role in the maintenance, care, and picking of the hops plant and ultimately help the breweries possibly reduce the price of beer, and as a reward, get a growler or access to a portion of the beer that is produced as a result.

Producers Producers will need to prepare themselves for the changing climate. Their primary resource should by the Cornell Cooperative Extension. Steve Miller, who was hired by the Cornell Cooperative Extension, can answer any growing question and deal with any growing difficulties that the farmers encounter, under the auspices of the Co-op. This research will be vital for the sustainable development of hops production. Additionally, the Northeast Hop Alliance will serve as a resource as well. The Northeast Hop Alliance was founded in 2001 to “explore the feasibility of re-establishing commercial specialty hop production in New York and the Northeast.” It will also be important for farmers to create a culture of support amongst themselves, so as to share infrastructure and save on costs. More efficient growing methods will ultimately address the labor expenses, currently hindering growth.

Conclusion Considering the developmental nature of the growing hops industry in the state, all vulnerabilities are considered in light of the ability for the farmer and brewer to adapt without deficit. Speaking to farmers and brewers provided valuable insight on the perceived threat of climate change. Their insights on the successes and challenges of running their farm and/or brewery suggest that it is feasible for the hops industry to adhere to the principles of sustainable development. There is potential for Madison County to rebrand itself and potentially become a frontrunner of the hops industry if the government, producers, and consumers all adhere to the recommendations. All of the recommendations attempt to spread the vulnerability among all of the stakeholders of the industry and minimize the risk associated with the amount of investment needed. As for the agricultural landscape of Madison County, we are hoping to see an increase in hops acreage in the years to come. The demand for craft breweries and beer, therefore hops, is there. The interest in the industry from the younger generations is also beneficial, especially compared to other agricultural sectors that have an aging population. It is important to consider how an increase in hops production could change incentives of farmers in other industries because we would not want one sector to be negatively impacted at the expense of hops growth. All of these projections are dependent on if hops can withstand the changing climate in the years to come and we will not be able to fully understand the impacts until the changes are realized.

20

Acknowledgements We would like to express our deepest gratitude towards everyone who willingly shared their time with us throughout this process. Specifically, we would like to acknowledge the following people that contributed to this report: Professor Wyatt Galusky Steve Miller, NYS Hops Specialist Nick Matt, Saranac Jim Wrobel, Wrobel Farms Foothill Hops Farm Colgate University

References Angel, K. (2014, October 23). New York Farms Get Hoppy. Retrieved October 25, 2014, from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-23/new-york-hops-craft- beer-boom- fuels-farming-revival Baur, J. (2014, May 21). New York State: America's Former Hop Capital. Retrieved December 10, 2014, from http://www.craftbeer.com/craft-beer-muses/new-york- state-americas-former-hop-capital Boström, M. (2012) A missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability: Introduction to the special issue. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, 8(1): 3–14. Frey, W. (2013). Freiburg Green City. Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg: Herder. Hales, D., W. Hohenstein, M. D. Bidwell, C. Landry, D. McGranahan, J. Molnar, L. W. Morton, M. Vasquez, and J. Jadin, (2014): Ch. 14: Rural communities. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 333- 349. doi:10.7930/ J01Z429C. Hatfield, J., G. Takle, R. Grotjahn, P. Holden, R. C. Izaurralde, T. Mader, E. Marshall, and D. Liverman, 2014: Ch. 6: Agriculture. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 150-174. doi:10.7930/J02Z13FR. Kates, R., T. M. Parris, and A. A. Leiserowitz, (2005). What is sustainable development: goals, indicators, values, and practice, Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 47(3), pp. 9-21.

21

Madison County Hop Heritage Trail Guide. (2006, September 17). Retrieved October 25, 2014, from http://www.madisontourism.com/trail_hop.pdf Montell, S. (1994). BT - Hops in the Backyard: From Planting to Harvest and the Hazards in Between. Retrieved October 25, 2014 from http://morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/library/backissues/issue2.3/montell.ht ml. Mozny, M., Tolasz, R., Nekovar, J., Sparks, T., Trnka, M., & Zalud, Z. (2009). The impact of climate change on the yield and quality of Saaz hops in the Czech Republic. Agricultural and forest meteorology, 149(6), 913-919. Multimedia, W. (2012). HOPPED UPSTATE: Rise of Hop Farming in New York. Retrieved October 25, 2014, from http://vimeo.com/75160196 Pickard, B, (2013). The Climate Change PR Disaster. The Holmes Report, pp.1-10. Retrieved from: http://www.holmesreport.com/opinion-info/14303/The-Climate-Change- PR- Disaster.aspx. Rosenzweig, C., A. DeGaetano, W. Solecki, R. Horton, M. O’Grady, and D. Bader (2011): Annex II: Climate Adaptation Guidebook for New York State. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, 4-30. Solecki, W. et al. (2011). Vulnerability and adaptation. 50-59. Theis, T., Tomkin, J. (2012) Sustainability: A comprehensive foundation; University of Illinois: Urbana-Champagne. Thiele, L. (2013). Geography of sustainability. In Sustainability (pp. 39-64). Cambridge: Polity.

Appendices

Appendix I- Steve Miller Interview Questions

1. What do you do? How did you get into hops? 1. what is a hops specialist?

2. Why is hops returning to this area? 1. We know that there is a history of hops production that was wiped out about

100 years ago due to pests/ fungi and prohibition 2. What was a motivator for the return? Demand? Viable?

3. What are the hop varieties in New York? 1. do you find that some are able to flourish more readily?

4. What role do College towns play in the reinstatement of the production of hops?

22

5. Are there any documents/ contacts that you would find useful? 1. Has a cost benefit analysis been done?

6. What are the risks to hops production in upstate NY? 1. climate? 2. production cost? 3. harvesting time? 4. harvesting scale? 5. ecology of the area? 6. local/ micro breweries

7. How many farms are there? 1. large scale? 2. Is this a primary source for farmers or more of side business?

8. How does hops play into sustainability for Madison County? 1. is it viable for the future?

9. What factors play a role in the production of hops? Risks? 1. water abundance 2. temperature (chill factor) 3. pests? 4. soil degradation 5. weather extremes

10. What is madison county sacrificing for the produce of hops? 1. is it a money maker? 2. do we need subsidies to farm hops?

11. What is the legislative plan for the future of hops? 1. Who are the relevant stakeholders?

12. Are there health benefits of hops? 1. vitamins?

Appendix II- Chase Jackson Interview Questions

1. How do you make beer? 2. Why did you start Good Nature?

1. College Town? 3. How much of your beers contain local products?

1. Hops? - We noticed you use hops from Foothill Farm (do you have a contact?) 1. How do you determine the quality of hops? 2. do you use different varieties for different beers? 3. how closely do you work with the people you source your resources

from? 4. in the past 4 years have your hops been consistent? quality/ quantity?

2. Barley? - Canasota 3. Why do you focus locally? - motivated economically? cultural significance? 4. What is your historical connection to the hops in madison county?

4. How viable is it to source it from Madison County? 1. are there some things you cannot get from this area?

23

2. is it cost effective not to be getting hops from the west where we know it is less expensive?

5. “Hops are really great for preserving bone density, and there are a lot of nutrients, minerals, and vitamins — a huge amount of B vitamins, especially in unfiltered beer. We don’t use any of the nasty stuff, so when you strip it down, it’s grains, herbs, and water.”

6. Is there a specific hops variety you wished you had access to? 7. What do you see for the future (10 years) of Good Nature?

1. are there any challenges you face currently? 2. is the changing climate on your radar?/ concern you/ the production of the

products for the production of beer? 3. more and more local?

Appendix III- Jim Wrobel Interview Questions

1. What do you do? 2. What do you grow on your farm? 3. Have you expanded your hops production through the years? How many acres? 4. How are your relationships with the breweries you sell to (Good Nature, Saranac,

etc)? 5. Would you consider expanding to more acres? Is there room for expansion?

Demand? 6. Do you face any challenges growing hops here? 7. Have you seen any climate change impacts on the crop recently? Are you worried

about climate change? 8. Where do you get the strains of hops that you grow? What grows best? 9. How fragile are the hops plants to weather and temperature? 10. Are there some strains that you can’t get or just can’t grow? 11. Which ones are most successful financially and in flavor?

Appendix IV- Nick Matt Interview Questions

1. If hops production grew in upstate New York would you be interested in purchasing locally?

2. Would a middle man incentivize local purchasing as well? 3. Have you ever considered doing microbrews with small harvests of local hops? 4. Have you paid attention to being sustainable on the large scale (shipping from other

countries)? 5. How integral are the hops that you do get locally? 6. What is your relationship like with Wrobel farms? 7. How many pounds of hops do you usually use in brewing? 8. Are there any incentives to partnering with a local hops farm? 9. How successful are your specialty brews made from local hops? 10. How do local hops contribute to making seasonal varieties of beer?

24