Tim James: The impossible task of getting Stellenbosch’s wards properly delimited

By , 9 March 2019



Some quiz questions about South Africa’s most important wine region: How many wards are there in Stellenbosch? What proportion of Stellenbosch is demarcated into wards? Name the wards. If you’re having trouble with that one, probably Papegaaiberg is one of those you’ve forgotten. Papegaaiberg? On what grounds, literal or otherwise, do you explain little Papegaaiberg? (The other six are Banghoek, Bottelary, Devon Valley, Jonkershoek Valley, Polkadraai Hills and Simonsberg-Stellenbosch; altogether only about 30% of the Stellenbosch district is delimited into wards.)

Stellenbosch wards discussion

Dutch sommelier Arjen Pleij leads the discussion.

Dutch sommelier Arjen Pleij, a deeply knowledgeable and frequent visitor to the Cape (his restaurant has a remarkably large list of South African wines), scratched his head over Papegaaiberg and wondered a lot about the wards of Stellenbosch in general, and the extent to which they were based on terroir. He couldn’t find out much about the subject – there wasn’t even a proper map showing them for interested visitors. So he started investigating the subject, for the dissertation part of his Magister Vini programme (the most advanced general wine qualification in the Netherlands, much like the local Cape Wine Master).

Arjen presented some of the results of his investigations last week at a seminar at Simonsig, to an audience including a number of Stellenbosch estate owners. His central argument was based on the increased respect for terroir evident in Stellenbosch winemaking, and greater international interest in the details of origin. He himself, he says, is these days tasting more differences in quality and character in different parts of the district.

A “complete overhaul” of the wards is needed, says Arjen. The existing wards should be re-examined, based on a proper understanding of terroir, and the remainder of the district also parcelled into sub-denominations. Helderberg is the obvious area that is known to be distinctive – and is even quite famous – but is not officially demarcated.

Helderberg is also the danger bell that, as the audience well knew, signals the huge problem involved. There is no agreement from the producers vaguely in the area of the mighty mountain’s slopes about just where to draw the boundaries. Even Stellenboschkloof (that valley with Jordan at its furthest end, and which one would have thought was pretty obvious and self-defined) failed to get agreement on what its ward boundaries would be.

This problem occupied most of the discussion that followed the presentation. I think it’s fair to say that all the 20-odd people present agreed that it would be great if the Stellenbosch wards could be redrawn on the basis of an understanding of the elements of physical terroir and the greatly improved scientific tools available to do a terroir-mapping. Although, as Jan Coetzee of Vrienhof said, “it would be a massive task”. (There was some talk about whether many estates would want to use the ward names, at the risk of confusing their largely non-geek customers, who are satisfied with “Stellenbosch” as the named origin on their labels. But that isn’t what the main discussion was about, and didn’t derail it.)

But. Always the big “but” of Winelands politics: how to achieve agreement? There were a couple of allusions to the example Coonawarra in Australia. Around that bit of demarcation some years back there was the sort of infighting (including legal challenges) that there inevitably would be around a meaningful definition of, say, Helderberg. “In or out” is always going to be a problem, in the words of Johan Malan of Simonsig, and no-one disagreed.

The answer seems obvious: leave it up to the experts to draw the boundaries, and impose them from above. However, the Demarcation Committee of the Wine and Spirit Board doesn’t do things in that way (in line with international practice, as far as I know). With no doubt laudably democratic intentions, it will only respond to coherent proposals from groups of producers, which it will then investigate for validity. Duimpie Bayly used to chair that committee, and he was at Arjen’s presentation. He was emphatically opposed to any other sort of procedure, although many of those present pointed out that it would be extraordinarily unlikely that there could be a consensus among producers about putting forward a joint, agreed proposal for a Helderberg ward.

Unfortunately, the current Demarcation Committee had declined an invitation to attend this discussion. We can hope that, at the very least, they will have read Arjen’s dissertation (available in both Dutch and English) and that it will prompt recognition of the major current problem in Stellenbosch, and stimulate some deep thinking about how to solve it.

More questions: Is an overhaul of Stellenbosch’s delimitations under the Wine of Origin Scheme needed? Certainly yes. Is it likely to happen in the foreseeable future? Um, no. But thanks to a Dutch sommelier we have a better understanding of the problem.

  • Tim James is one of South Africa’s leading wine commentators, contributing to various local and international wine publications. He is a taster (and associate editor) for Platter’s. His book Wines of South Africa – Tradition and Revolution appeared in 2013.



5 comment(s)

Please read our Comments Policy here.

    Michael Ratcliffe | 11 March 2019

    This invaluable research is most welcome and Stellenbosch should thank Arjen Pleij for opening up the conversation. To ignore the issue would be folly. To attempt to change the system with the stick of legislation would be short-sighted – and would fail. So, how to identify the metaphorical ‘carrot’ that could motivate change? Self-interest is a powerful unifying force if handled correctly. Stellenbosch producers will rally behind a powerful vision. Therein, potentially, lies the problem and the challenge – how to define a successful outcome?

    Wynand Lategan | 11 March 2019

    Agree totally with Chris. Focus on specific varietals, styles and terrior goes hand in hand if you want to build a global brand over time. Even is the model is not perfect I think the fact that there are different wards in Stellenbosch is important – even if it is just a starting point of discussion.

    Kevin R | 10 March 2019


    Quality will improve with better understanding of terroir and with terroir being allowed to impose itself more on the wines of a ward – with the better examples of wines (and the practises that went into making them) being followed by their neighbours or producers with similar sites. The brands you enjoy would improve, whether you’re into ‘geeky stuff’ or not, just from practises that better suit the site.

    Chris Alheit | 10 March 2019

    Regionality must be one of the most important discussions for the coming years. The whole “every body makes everything” model has seriously limited global appeal. We need way better regional identity.

    Jeremy Sampson | 9 March 2019

    Fascinating article by Tim, but at the risk of offending, so what?
    Perhaps a follow up article on why, if indeed they are, wards are important.
    Otherwise all this energy and no doubt emotion going into a fruitless exercise.
    After all does the average buyer of wine care?
    Do Stellenbosch producers charge a premium over other areas, don’t think so.
    I will buy the brand, knowing whoever it is, wherever the fruit comes from, will ensure the guaranteed quality I demand.
    Rather put time and energy into reducing, not adding to, the fragmentation and building up the reputation of South Sfrican wine as a whole, arguably at irs best ever.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Like our content?

Show your support.