ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (84) 4 40 
 
 
 
Vol. 1984/0 183 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the openi ng to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Community and the European Atomic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this f ile is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 198 3 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 vom 27 .9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION O F THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(84) 440 final
Brussels, 25th July 1984
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL  
ON THE SITUATION AND OUTLOOK FOR THE COMMUNITY WINE SECTOR
COM(84) 440 final

4 4
- 1 -
Following the informal meeting of Ministers of Agriculture held in Angers on  
28 and 29 May 1984, the special group of national market directors met on 14  
June and 11 July to examine the situation on the Community wine market and to  
study possible ways of ensuring that the existing legislation was correctly  
applied.
On the basis of the guidelines which emerged from that high-level meeting the  
Commission is now presenting the Council with its conclusions concerning the  
action to be taken in order to improve the way in which the common 
organization of the market in wine operates. Xt is proposing two sets of  
measures:
urgent measures, in line with the reform of the wine market negotiated in  
1982 and intended to remedy defects which have been revealed in practice;
— other measures which are less urgent but nevertheless necessary in order  
to prevent new crises occurring, intended to restore lasting balance to  
the market by gradually adjusting output to demand.
I.  IMMEDIATE MEASURES
1. Drawing up the forward estimate
The basic Regulation requires production and stock levels to be  
notified to the competent authorities of Member States, which  
communicate this information to the Commission so that the forward  
estimate of availabilities and consumption can be drawn up by 10  
December. The forward estimate drawn up by the Commission serves as a  
point of reference for management of the wine market in general and  
more particularly for triggering the compulsory distillation at low  
prices which was brought in by the 1982 reform. In the 1983/84  
marketing year the quantities of table wine available in certain Membe  
States were greatly underestimated because the Member States were  
unable to provide more realistic estimates.

-  2 -
In order to have reliable data concerning availabilities and  
consumption, which is a prior condition of effective market management,  
on 13 July the Commission adopted a new Regulation on harvest,  
production and stock declarations in the wine sector. This Regulation  
provides in particular, and without prejudice to any sanctions at  
national level, that persons who have not submitted the necessary  
declarations or who have submitted declarations containing incomplete  
or incorrect information will henceforth not qualify for intervention  
measures which require knowledge of the missing information for their  
implementation.
Xhe Commission also reserves the right to use, for drawing up the  
Community forward estimate, not only the statistical data supplied by  
Member States but also any source of information at its disposal  
concerning both availabilities (stocks and production) and uses. This  
approach will shortly be embodied in a Commission Regulation.
2. Link_between_the_different_types_of distillation
The intervention arrangements worked out in 1982 following the 1981  
crisis are based on a balance between two objectives:
— to withdraw surplus availabilities from the market by means of  
preventive distillation or, where necessary, compulsory distillation  
at the start of the marketing year;
- thereafter to guarantee producers a minimum price equal to 82% of  
the guide price.
In 1982/83 as in 1983/84, in view of the moderate harvest, table wine  
availabilities at the start of the marketing year did not justify  
compulsory distillation. The Commission, however, decided to provide  
for support distillation for 5 million hi and there has been an urgent  
request for it to do the same in respect of the current marketing year.  
Simultaneously, the volume of table wine distilled, which was 22  
million hi in 1982/83 <20% of production) will rise to 32 million <27% 
of production) in 1983/84, with a corresponding increase in EAGGF 
expenditure.

- 3 -
It is clear that, although the link created by Regulation between 
compulsory distillation and support distillation has not functioned as 
intended, preventive distillation has increased beyond all 
expectations, but without leading to any significant improvement in 
market prices.
In connection with the agreement on prices and the measures to 
rationalize the CAP reached on 31 March, the Council introduced three 
changes designed to give the Commission more flexibility in managing 
the market:
- the price for preventive distillation was set at 65% of the guide 
price (previously it was set at 60%, rising to 65% if there was no 
compulsory distillation),
— preventive distillation could be terminated at any time, which made 
it possible to curb the conclusion of speculative distillation 
contracts,
a link could be made between preventive distillation and support 
distillation.
Experience has shown that, although it relieves the table wine market, 
preventive distillation, because it does not involve any limit on the 
quantities of wine delivered, prevents the triggering of compulsory 
distillation, whose aim is precisely to place the burden of 
retionalizing the market at the start of the marketing year on those 
producers who have obtained the highest yields.
In order to prevent compulsory distillation from missing its goal and 
so that the rules on preventive distillation are not abused, the 
Commission is proposing that for the 1984/85 marketing year, in 
accordance with the management committee procedure:
- the final date for the conclusion of preventive distillation 
contracts should be set at 5 December 1984, and that the total 
quantities under contract should be notified to the Commission by 
Member States within a very short period (48 hours);
- the quantities eligible for preventive distillation should be 
limited to a certain volume per hectare cultivated.

- 4 -
The Commission thus expects to have the relevant information for 
drawing up the forward estimate on 10 December and to be in a position, 
by controlling the quantities being presented for preventive 
distillation, to initiate compulsory distillation in accordance with 
the principle of equity underlying the market regulation and 
stabilization measure adopted in 1982 and not applied since then.
In connection with the amendments to the general rules on distillation 
currently being discussed in the Council, the Commission also proposes 
that the security payable for obtaining the advance on distillation aid 
be raised from 110% to 130% of the aid, to prevent quantities of wine 
under distillation contracts disrupting the market in table wines 
should prices improve.
3. Access_to dis_tjJLlat_ion_for_wi_nes_other_thari table wines. j[wines_made
from_table_jgra£es.,_Charentes_winesJ.  wines. made_from grap«js_for_dryjjig)
The intervention arrangements provide for compulsory distillation at 
50% of the guide price for certain wines which must not in principle be 
disposed of on the market in table wines but which, experience has 
shown, do reach the market in large quantities and are able to qualify 
for a higher purchase price under the preventive distillation 
arrangements.
In order to apply the existing rules strictly, the Commission proposes 
that the exemptions provided for be kept to a minimum and that the 
criteria of "quantity of wine normally produced" and "quantities of 
wine put to traditional uses" specified in Article 40(2) of the basic 
Regulation be revised.
The rules introduced in 1982 do in fact make a distinction between two 
categories of production for compulsory distillation under Article 40 
of the basic Regulation:

- 5 -
1) on the one hand, wine made from grapes not listed as wine grape 
varieties for the administrative unit concerned (Article 40(1)).
All such wine must be distilled before the end of the wine-growing 
year in which it was produced.
In practice thiB applies only to the Italian regions of Apulia and 
Sicily.
2) on the other hand, wine produced from a grape variety listed as both 
a wine grape variety and a variety for use for another purpose 
(Article 40(2)).
All such wine which is produced in excess of the normal quantity and 
which is not exported must be distilled before the end of the 
wine-growing year in which it was produced.
In practice this applies to the following:
(a) mainly in Italy and to a lesser degree in Greece and France, 
wine made from grapes classified for an administrative unit as 
both table grape varieties and wine grape varieties.
The quantities of wine falling within this category normally 
produced correspond to a yield per hectare in Italy (province of 
Chieti) fixed by that Member State of 100 hi and in France 
(Mediterranean region), as fixed by France, of 35 hi.
(b) in France, wine made from grapes classified for an 
administrative unit as both wine grape varieties and varieties 
for the production of wine spirits of designated origin.
The quantities of wine normally produced in this category 
(Cognac, pineau des Charentes,  wine for the production of 
sparkling wine and table wines) correspond to a yield per 
hectare fixed by France of 105 hi.

-  6 -
(c) in Greece, wine made from varieties usually used for the 
production of dried grapes, either dual-purpose varieties 
(Corinth Black, for drying or wine-making) or triple-purpose 
varieties (Sultana variety for the production of dried grapes, 
table grapes or wine).
Experience has led the Commission to conclude that the yields per 
hectare fixed in Italy for table grapes made into wine and in France 
for the Charentes region are excessive and should be adjusted downwards 
(e.g. province of Chieti: 50 hl/ha; Charentes region: 80 hl/ha).
The situation in Greece needs to be approached in the same way and a 
similar limit fixed not for the country as a whole but for individual 
production areas. The Commission requests the Member States to take a 
very strict line in the matter and would stress that, if they do not, 
will be obliged to fix the yields in question itself.

- 7 -
XI.  MEDIUM-TERM MEASURES
1. Control of „wine-growing, potential and soclo-structuraljneasures
a) Premiums _for_the_abandonment_of wine—growlnn areas (Regulation (EEC) 
No 456/80)
The Commission will be sending the Council two proposals for 
Regulations:
- The first Regulation would prematurely repeal the provisions of 
Regulation (EEC) No 456/80 currently in force providing for aid 
for the temporary abandonment of vineyards until the end of the 
1986/87 marketing year and aid for permanent abandonment until the 
end of 1994/95. The proposal would restrict the grant of aid for 
temporary abandonment to the 1984/85 marketing year.
- The second would provide for a new aid scheme for permanent 
abandonment from the 1985/86 marketing year.
The new scheme, which could run for five years, would cover:
- in the case of wine grape areas
= classified in categories 2 or 3: all varieties;
= classified in category 1: only authorized varieties, (i.e.
excluding recommended varieties).
The amount of the premium would vary depending on the average yield 
per hectare declared by the wine grower in previous years (e.g. 
yield < 90 hl/ha, yield between 90 and 130 hl/ha, yield >
130 hl/ha) and the age of the vineyard (e.g. < 15 years, >
15 years).

-  8 -
— in the case of table grape areas: all varieties. The amount of
the premium would depend on the variety (these would be classified 
into two groups: large-grape varieties and small—grape varieties)
and the method of training (either on a pergola or by another 
method);
— in the case of the Charentes vineyards: all varieties;
— in the case of areas under grapes for drying: all varieties.
The aid could be increased in the case of wine growers who abandoned 
all of their wine growing area.
There could be compensation for wine cooperatives whose members 
received an abandonment premium. The amount of compensation would 
be proportional to the reduction in deliveries as a result of 
abandonment.
In order to make these measures attractive and for them to produce
the maximum result, it would be particularly advisable, in addition
to increasing the premiums, to provide for an appreciable increase 
in the Community contribution (e.g. 60% instead of 40% as at 
present) and, more important, to arrange for this contribution to be 
paid directly against proof of grubbing and not, as at present, in 
the form of a reimbursement against proof of payment.
The figures relating to the various measures are shown in the table
annexed hereto.
b) Aids_for_coll.ec.tiye projects for the restructuring of vineyards. 
(Regulation (EEC) No 458/80)
The common measure in question is planned to run until 31 August 
1986. Collective projects for vineyards restructuring may be 
submitted until that date and the beneficiaries have ten years from 
when the Commission approves the projects during which to replant.

- 9 -
In the present situation and given the need not to encourage with 
public money measures which would indeed help to improve the quality 
of output but would also inevitably lead to an increase in quantity, 
the Commission proposes that the measures provided for in Regulation 
(EEC) No 458/80 should not be rolled over.
Restructuring measures specific to certain mountain or hill vineyard 
areas might be considered.
° Under Directive 7.8/627/EEC_on Languedoc-Roussillon
The Commission will propose that this common measure be continued until 
31 December 1985, but only for certain hill vineyard areas.
c)  Aid fop improving processilL6_and_markeSing_struetures (Regulation 
(EEC) No 355/77)
In view of the milk sector’s serious problems of surpluses, it was 
decided to exclude the financing of installations for processing and 
marketing milk from the scope of the Regulation. The situation in 
the wine sector has become so bad that it is now necessary to 
consider a similar step. Producers of wines for which there is 
proper market demand will have no great difficulty in themselves 
finding finance for up-to-date marketing structures. On the other 
hand, growers who produce without worrying too much about finding 
outlets for their wine will be forced either to reduce their output 
or to make the necessary effort to adapt.

-  10 -
The Commission therefore proposes that the wine sector be excluded 
from the scope of the Regulation, although some flexibility might be 
allowed in individual cases where there is no danger of output 
increasing, the aid being for marketing structures only.
d) Limit.ing_the_exerci_se of the right to replant.
The structural measures proposed, and those recently adopted by the 
Council, for banning new planting will not be enough to bring 
production down quickly to the level of current normal utilization.
The Commission will therefore propose, for ten years, a reduction in 
replanting rights varying from 30% to 50%, according to whether the 
new vineyards are to be irrigated or not, when the aim of consistent 
irrigation is in fact to increase production. The proposals will 
provide, where necessary, for compensation to be paid.
Such a measure would be accompanied by a provision making it more 
widely possible to transfer replanting rights from one holding to 
another.
The present rules lay down that rights may be so transferred only 
when the planting is for quality wines par, subject to authorization 
by national authorites.
The scope of such transfers should be widened to include table-wine 
vineyards with long-term prospects of commercial outlets.
The Commission is not unaware of the difficulties which such a 
reduction might cause in areas producing quality wines psr, 
especially in the more northern parts of the Community, where 
vineyard plots are more rigidly divided and there may be 
difficulties in effecting transfers. It is nonetheless convinced 
that the Community must adopt the general rule that replanting 
rights be reduced.
Solutions for specific cases, which are likely to be very small in 
number, could be sought under Community procedures.

-  11 -
Enrichment
The aim of enrichment is to compensate for inadequate levels of sugar 
in the grapes harvested due to poor weather. Proper use of this 
technique presupposes that the yield per hectare remains normal for the 
region in question, and that the price of the product used for 
enrichment Is at least equal to that of achieving the same result 
through the grapes harvested. Otherwise it will be in the producer's 
interest to maximize his yields, as the increased output for sale more 
than makes up for the low cost of increasing the wine's alcoholic 
strength.
As only the regions where chaptalization is allowed enjoyed this 
economic advantage, the Council decided in 1982 to put all producers on 
the same footing by granting aid for the use of concentrated must or 
rectified concentrated must to producers not allowed to resort to 
chaptalization.
In so doing the Council did exactly the opposite of what the Commission 
had proposed, which was to get rid of the discrimination involved by 
increasing the price of sucrose. The result was that it became in all 
producers' interest to enrich, as the price per degree of alcohol from 
the addition of sucrose or Community-aided must is now well below the 
market price of a degree of alcohol, and even that of the least 
expensive distillation. In view of this, and being convinced that the 
situation can only be normalized if the price of products used for 
enrichment is equal to, if not higher than, that of the extra alcohol 
from grapes alone, the Commission has proposed to the Council that both 
chaptalization and the system of aid for using concentrated must and 
rectified concentrated must should be simply done away with from the 
1989/90 wine year.

- 12 -
The technical objection by users of sucrose that rectified concentrated 
must would "denature” their wines is now without foundation, as is 
indisputably proved by the conclusions of the study carried out under 
the "Agrimed” programme in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy 
and Greece.
The only objection still possible is a socio-economic one. Although 
the loss of an acquired right is not always welcome, the improved 
market balance which will come about through the removal of large 
amounts of must <4 to 5 million hectolitres) to be used for enrichment 
will quite certainly justify these producers losing the advantage they 
have enjoyed so far. Apart from compulsory measures this is the only 
way in which a genuine brake can be put on the rush to excessive yields.
The Commission can therefore only repeat its previous proposal on this 
matter (1), but with the following concession: from 1985/86 the aid
for must would be progressively reduced and a levy would be charged, in 
regions where chaptalization is allowed, on all wines marketed by those 
producing more than 80 hl/ha. This levy would peak in the last wine 
year before chaptalization was banned. Revenue from the levy would go 
to offset expenditure on the aid for enrichment.
The Commission also considers that, for such time as the use of sucrose  
is allowed, it should be limited to a fixed quantity per hectare. ThiB  
would avoid giving an advantage to those producing large quantities of  
low-strength wine.
(1) COM(83)639 final, 25 November 1983

- 13 -
3 >  Yield« for quality wines par
Under Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 338/79 yields for quality wines 
per are fixed by the Member States and if exceeded use of the 
designation claimed is, except where general or individual derogations 
are given by the Member States, prohibited for the entire harvest.
If a derogation is given a Member State must specify the use to be made 
of the surplus wine.
It is quite clear from experience that the rules vary very markedly 
from one Member State to another and that the distinction between table 
wines and quality wines par has not always been very clear, 
particularly when harvests have been very abundant.
In Germany the maximum yields are fixed in hl/ha and vary from one Land 
to another between 75 and 120 hl/ha.
No provisions are laid down for quantities in excess of these maxima.
In France yields are fixed in hl/ha for each designation. Each 
defining decree sets a basic yield and a classification ceiling. The 
basic yield can be altered each year in line with the quality and 
quantity of the harvest and the modified basic yield is termed the 
annual yield.
The designation is granted for yields below the annual yield. It may 
be granted for yields between the annual yield and the classification 
ceiling under certain conditions. It can even be granted up to the 
limit of the classification ceiling if this is exceeded, provided that 
the wine has passed the prescribed analytic and organoleptic tests and 
the producer has undertaken to have the excess quantities distilled.
The basic yield varies by designation between 30 and 100 hl/ha. The 
classification ceiling is generally 15 to 20% higher than the basic 
yield.

- 14 -
In Italy yields are fixed for each designation in quintals of grapes 
per hectare. In certain cases the designation may be granted if the 
maximum yield is exceeded by 20% provided that the quantity of grapes 
to be turned into wine is reduced by selection to the authorized 
limit. A grape/must conversion coefficient is fixed for each 
designation and the yields in hl/ha on the basis of these coefficients 
vary between 28 and 105 hl/ha (except for the "Nuragus di Cagliari" 
designation, for which the yield is 140 hl/ha).
In Greece the yields for each designation are fixed in kilograms of 
grapes per hectare. The designation is not granted if the maximum 
yield is exceeded.
The Greek legislative texts do not specify either the procedure to be 
adopted where the maximum yields are exceeded or the grape conversion 
coefficients.
Maximum yields in kg grapes/ha vary from 5.300 to 12.000. On the basis 
of an average conversion coefficient of 70% they range from 35 to 
85 hl/ha.
To give better control of the Bector and prevent quality wines psr 
competing directly with table wines when their traditional outlets are 
saturated the Commission will propose:
(a) fixing at 100 hl/ha throughout the Community the maximum quantity 
of wine per hectare that can be recognized as quality wine psr,
<b) allowing the granting of the designation, where the top yields
fixed by the Member States for each designation are exceeded, only 
where the excess is not more than 20% (up to a ceiling of 
10 hi.ha) and on condition that:

- 15 -
(x) half of the excess quantity is stored during the production 
year in question with no possibility of marketing and with a 
view to its being recognized for the following year,
<ii) half is sent for distillation without any public intervention 
procedure being used;
<c> publishing in the C Series of the Official Journal of the
Communities the yields per hectare fixed by the Member States for 
each quality wine psr produced on their territory.
The Commission will also propose to the Council that the existing 
situation be frozen by prohibiting the recognition of new designations 
origin except in extremely limited cases where the argument for 
recognition is overwhelming. Such prohibition is needed to prevent the 
burdening of a market that is at the moment as a whole manifestly over 
supplied. From the 1985/86 wine year recognition of new designations 
by the national procedure will be subject to prior approval by means of 
a Community procedure to be defined.
A.  Establishment of a vitlcultural register
This is an old idea brought up again when the new basic wine rules 
introduced by the Council in July 1982 were being discussed. The 
Commission will propose its establishment, the minimum time needed 
being five years.
(a) Purpose;
To create a regularly updated register containing full basic 
information, i.a. providing information on the areas devoted to 
vines, the various declarations (stocks, harvest, enriching, 
acidification, deacidification etc.), structural changes 
(varieties, grubbing up, planting, replanting, abandonment with 
premium, etc.), intervention (distillation, storage), recognition 
as quality wine psr, etc.

- 16 -
(b> Methods
The methods, which are already applied in the olive-growing
sector, will be essentially as follows:
— aerial photography of the areas concerned, with enlargement of 
the photographs and their conversion into plans for
superimpositon on the cadastral maps, so that the relation may 
be established between the areas photographed and the holdings 
themselves ;
— surveys at ground level to supplement the photographs with 
agricultural data (varieties, etc.);
— recording of the data on areas and of all data on each producer 
(declarations, aid applications, recognition of quality wines 
psr, etc.) in a computer which i6 sufficiently powerful to do 
all the necessary cross-checking and to give the position of 
each operator "in real time”.
(c) Cost
The cost cannot be precisely estimated. The preparation of the 
register of olive-growers in Italy cost about 70 million ECU, 
covering 2,28 million ha; in Greece, the cost was about 75 
million ECU. According to a preliminary Italian estimate, the 
cost should be about 35 million ECU for Italy alone. This 
estimate takes account of the fact that in Italy some of the 
photographic equipment is already available. For the Community 
as a whole (the Ten), the Commission puts expenditure at about 
100 million ECU, spread over five years, with 50% being financed 
by the EAGGF and 50% by the Member States concerned.

- 17 -
5·  Measures to expand markets
The Commission stands by its recommendation of 5 December 1975 in which 
it proposed that the Member States should reduce the level of the 
highest excise duties on wine. It appreciates the efforts made in this 
direction by the United Kingdom which, on 14 March 1984, reduced the 
excise duties on wine, in line with the Court of Justice’s ruling in 
Case 170/78. Some progress has still to be made in the wider context 
and in certain countries such as Ireland.
Progress should be assisted by the information and promotion campaigns 
on behalf of table wine which have been approved in principle by the 
Council and which should be launched in late 1984 in some of the 
countries concerned.
As regards other possible outlets for vine products (other than wine), 
the Commission will propose:
- firstly, that the aid currently granted for the manufacture of grape 
juice should be adjusted so as to lend support to the promotional 
campaigns on behalf of such juice;
— secondly, that the research programmes on new uses for vine products 
should be continued beyond their expiry date in 1985. The 
Commission also reserves the right to propose, in the light of the 
results obtained from the present programme, that musts for use as 
feed should be eligible for withdrawal under the intervention 
arrangements.
6. Possible introduction of guarantee thresholds
In order to include the wine sector in the general policy of guarantee 
thresholds, the Commission proposes that the guide prices should be 
"frozen” and increased only when the quantities going for voluntary 
distillation or for compulsory distillation under Article 41 of the 
basic Regulation do not exceed about 10% of average table wine 
production, i.e. 12 million hi.

(VIPB2—132)
B m a a « a a t t a s B a B a c B S B a B i i a « B u a g c c a a i « a i B a i s a t M « « B B a B B S K a s a 8 S 3 s « a B » S B S B B B K a s B a 8 a i B B H B « 0 a « B * a a a a « a B B a B B « a a B « s B « B B a B u · · · · « · · · · « · · · · ·
Category of vineyardAmount of Dremium Areas
concerned
(ha)Total cost  
(million ECU)Cost to EACGF  
(60%)
(million ECU)Corresponding  
drop in 
production  
(million hi)under 15  
yearsOver 15 
years
A. Areas under wine aranes  
- yield < 90 hl/ha 6 000 5 000 80 000 440 *.8
- yield between 90 and 130 hl/ha 7 500 6 500 50 000 350■5.5
- yield > 130 hl/ha 9 000 8 000 50 000 450 7.5
B. Areas under table (traces  
- pergola; large-grape varieties 10 000 9 000 20 000 200 / 4
- pergola; other varieties 8 000 7 000 1 000 8
— other methods of braining;  
large-grape varieties 7 000 6 000 500 3)
)
) 0.1 
)
)- other methods of training;  
other varieties 6 000 5 000 1 000 5.5
C. Charentes vineyard 7 000 6 000 7 000 45.5 0,7
TOTAL
Total per year1 502 
300900
18022,7