As California’s Wine Industry Struggles, Some Lodi Grape Growers Pivot to New Crops 12%

By Hannah Weaver0%

6/12/2026, 11:00:02 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 12.8% saturation with 194 hits. Analysis detected 1,567 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,520 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 29% and a BS Rank of 12% (18,689 of 21,198 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 88.20% of the article peer group.

At the Mohr-Fry Ranch, just south of the Central Valley city of Lodi, peacocks roamed through one vineyard on a blindingly sunny spring day. 
Mohrgan Fry strolled through her family’s ranch, pointing a manicured pink nail at rows of dark brown, gnarly vine branches that split off in all directions. 
“They all look like they have a story to tell, right?” 
she said. 
That includes the story of her family, who have been farming grapes in the region for six decades. 
For the past 13 years, they’ve been cultivating grapes exclusively. 
But when California’s wine industry began bottoming out over the past few years, driven by what growers say is the worst industry storm they have seen in their lifetimes, the family started looking at different options. 
“Where the industry is at, you have to be able to diversify and be willing to try something new,” Fry said. 
Grapes are everywhere in Lodi  in the city’s official logo. 
On murals downtown. 
They’re the namesake of the stadium and the annual “Lodi Grape Festival.” 
The city of 66,000 has about a dozen wine tasting rooms  and that’s just within the city limits. 
But it’s no longer just the land of the grape. 
Orchards full of pistachios, almonds and olives are popping up all over the city’s outskirts as challenges in the wine industry are pushing growers to try other crops. 
Wine consumption is down globally, according to reports from the International Organisation of Vine and Wine. 
National reports from the Napa-based Wine Market Council show baby boomers are drinking less as they age. 
Younger generations are drinking less too, as they become more health  and wallet  conscious. 
On the supply side, California grape growers are having to compete with cheaper foreign-grown grapes. 
Consequently, growers in Lodi and across the state are ripping vines out. 
About 10% of vines in the Lodi area were removed in the last year alone, according to a report from the California Association of Winegrape Growers. 
About a fifth of California’s vineyard acreage has been ripped out since 2022, state data shows. 
Some smaller vineyards are closing shop altogether. 
Others are taking unique approaches, like leasing their land for use as water-recharge basins. 
But for grape growers who want to continue growing, there is one key to staying afloat  crop diversification. 
That’s especially true for larger farming operations, according to Lodi Winegrape Commission Executive Director Stuart Spencer. 
“We honestly think this is a good thing,” he said. 
“I think diversification is always good from an economic and business perspective and  ecological perspective.” 
As a sixth-generation farmer, it’s not surprising that Fry knows so much about grapes. 
She grew up around the family business and always knew she wanted to be a part of it. 
“I hate sitting in the office,” she said. 
“But I love being outside. 
I love being with Mother Nature.” 
Given the choice, she’d spend every minute in the vineyards. 
“You get to make decisions that are different than in an office or in a lab, because you’re out there and you’re making pruning decisions, and then you see the results within a few months,” she said. 
After studying the business and engineering of agriculture at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, she knew she wanted to bring what she’d learned back to her family’s ranch as operations manager. 
But when she graduated two years ago, the industry was tanking. 
“Ironically, I think it was actually the best time to come join the industry, I think for me, for my family,” she said. 
“It’s a time for us to really think about the decisions we’re making and how we can be more efficient, how we can save money, but still be able to provide for our employees and continue to farm.” 
The Frys are no strangers to diversification. 
Over the 171 years their family has been farming, they’ve grown 30 different crops. 
They started out in what is now Hayward, but at the time was land claimed by the Spanish. 
Fry’s great-great-great-grandfather left a whaling ship in the San Francisco Bay to start farming. 
The family didn’t start with grapes. 
Instead, they grew crops like tomatoes, sugar beets and wheat. 
As Hayward became more urban, they moved the operation to Lodi in 1965 and got into the wine business. 
It was right around that time that Mohrgan’s grandfather, Jerry Fry, took over the business. 
He’s seen it through labor shifts from World War II to the Bracero Program that brought workers from Mexico. 
A few decades later, Mohrgan’s dad, Bruce Fry, came into the business. 
Like Mohrgan, he’d just graduated from Cal Poly. 
At that time, wineries were consolidating, leaving grape growers with fewer buyers. 
Many of the same issues the family faced then have continued. 
Fewer wineries, increasing labor costs, damaging pests. 
And now, more foreign competition and decreasing wine consumption. 
Jerry said none of the previous threats have been quite like the current one. 
“In my perspective, this has been the most challenging of anything that I think our family has dealt with,” Jerry said. 
In the past, they could plant a different crop every year and rip it out if it wasn’t selling well. 
Now, because of the soil type and price of the land, annual crops don’t make financial sense for them. 
That means picking a permanent crop, one they’ll be committed to for the next two decades. 
For the past year or so, the family’s been weighing their options. 
They’ve been talking to neighbors, looking at research, setting up spreadsheets. 
At the moment, they’re leaning toward olives. 
And last fall, they ripped out a block of their vineyards to begin their next chapter. 
On another one of the Frys’ properties just north of Lodi, Mohrgan and Bruce stood on a gravel path that runs right through the past and future of their farming operation. 
On the south side, where there once were Chardonnay grapes, little green sprouts stick up out of the dirt, far into the distance. 
It’s safflower, a transitional crop. 
Mohrgan explained it will help add some nutrients to the soil that the vineyards had used up. 
“It’s really good for the soil health, for its porosity, all those other fun things,” she said. 
Transitioning crops is a yearslong process. 
After the grape harvest this past fall, they ripped out the vines. 
For several months, they planted safflower in its place. 
By this time next year, the safflower will be swapped out for the new permanent crop, likely olives. 
The process was made possible with the aid of a regional government initiative, the Ag Burn Alternatives Grant Program, that paid to help remove the vines in an environmentally friendly way. 
“I think that the program is really great because [it] saves you some money,” she said. 
“Getting your tax dollars back, right?” 
Mohrgan and her family are keenly aware of what the government is  and isn’t  doing to help farmers like them. 
Even as they spoke with a reporter, Bruce got an alert on his phone and pulled up a livestream of a state Assembly hearing. 
The hearing focused on AB 1585, a bill that would require wines to be made with 100% American grapes if vintners want to use an “American” designation on the label. 
The Fry family and many other growers in the state say it will stop wineries from blending in cheaper foreign grapes. 
They also hope it will encourage them to buy from American growers, most of which are in California. 
For 40 minutes, Mohrgan held the phone on the hood of her blue Chevy truck. 
She and her dad watched intently as assemblymembers debated the bill. 
Eventually, the committee members voted to move the bill along to the next stage. 
“Hopefully this bill keeps going, keeps rolling,” Mohrgan said. 
“Baby steps,” Bruce said. 
If the bill does pass, it might alleviate one of the industry’s challenges. 
But there’s a long way to go if grape growers and vintners are to fully bounce back. 
Yet many growers like the Frys remain optimistic. 
They feel connected to grapes and believe the industry could be turning the corner soon. 
“This is the wine grape region, [and] it’s going to stay that way, but it’s just, it’s not going to be as big as what it was before,” Bruce said. 
“I think change is hard, but change makes things better.” 
Mohrgan said she feels encouraged by both the older generation’s willingness to pivot and her generation’s fresh ideas. 
Last year, the Lodi Winegrape Commission elected its youngest leadership team ever. 
“There’s just a lot of knowledge to learn from, like my grandpa and my dad, and I think because of that, we’ll make it through,” Mohrgan said. 
“You have, I wouldn’t say it’s a weight, but  you want to make your family proud.” 
With generations working together, they’re hoping to make wine feel less pretentious and more approachable for consumers. 
If they’re successful, Lodi could remain the land of the grape for years to come. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.2%Hannah Weaver: 0.5%CalMatters: 1.9%Confirmation Bias2.2%This article: 1.1%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.9%Anchoring Bias1.1%This article: 4.5%Hannah Weaver: 2.1%CalMatters: 3.0%Availability Heuristic4.5%This article: 1.1%Hannah Weaver: 0.8%CalMatters: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic1.1%This article: 1.5%Hannah Weaver: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.5%Hindsight Bias1.5%This article: 2.3%Hannah Weaver: 1.1%CalMatters: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias2.3%This article: 7.8%Hannah Weaver: 2.5%CalMatters: 6.3%Framing Effect7.8%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.0%Hannah Weaver: 1.0%CalMatters: 0.7%Status Quo Bias2.0%This article: 1.1%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect1.1%This article: 12.8%Hannah Weaver: 7.6%CalMatters: 3.5%Optimism Bias12.8%This article: 1.1%Hannah Weaver: 0.6%CalMatters: 1.4%Pessimism Bias1.1%This article: 7.2%Hannah Weaver: 1.9%CalMatters: 6.4%Negativity Bias7.2%This article: 1.7%Hannah Weaver: 0.8%CalMatters: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias1.7%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 1.4%Hannah Weaver: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias1.4%This article: 1.2%Hannah Weaver: 1.5%CalMatters: 1.7%In-Group Bias1.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.9%Hannah Weaver: 1.8%CalMatters: 2.7%Halo Effect0.9%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.3%Primacy Effect1.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.0%Hannah Weaver: 1.5%CalMatters: 3.1%Appeal to Authority6.0%This article: 3.7%Hannah Weaver: 1.5%CalMatters: 1.1%False Dilemma3.7%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.7%Hannah Weaver: 2.6%CalMatters: 3.6%Hasty Generalization6.7%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.5%Hannah Weaver: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.7%Bandwagon0.5%This article: 3.8%Hannah Weaver: 0.9%CalMatters: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion3.8%This article: 1.4%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.6%Begging the Question1.4%This article: 11.6%Hannah Weaver: 2.9%CalMatters: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.6%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 2.4%Hannah Weaver: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.2%Appeal to Nature2.4%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.3%Hannah Weaver: 1.1%CalMatters: 3.1%Anecdotal4.3%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.8%Hannah Weaver: 0.5%CalMatters: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.8%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.7%Hannah Weaver: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.7%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.2%Hannah Weaver: 0.8%CalMatters: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice3.2%This article: 2.5%Hannah Weaver: 0.6%CalMatters: 1.9%Indoctrination2.5%This article: 1.4%Hannah Weaver: 0.3%CalMatters: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Hannah Weaver: 0.5%CalMatters: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.0%

1520 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers25%attributed speech1,137writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 11 words • 100.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageStuart Spencer • 10 words • 0.0% coverageStuart Spencer • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 5 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 23 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageJerry Fry • 14 words • 0.0% coverageJerry Fry • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 9 words • 0.0% coverageBruce Fry • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageBruce Fry • 30 words • 0.0% coverageBruce Fry • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 27 words • 0.0% coverageMohrgan Fry • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Bruce Fry

100%flagged-word coverage
44 attributed words11% of attributed speech54% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Biased Writer Voice-4.3 ptsWriter: 4.3%Bruce Fry: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.7 ptsWriter: 2.7%Bruce Fry: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.