Ten years of hard work lost in a single day. That's the tragic situation Trish and Trevor Bunting found themselves in after their 10,500 healthy vines were wiped out by a herbicide that had been incorrectly labelled.
The Dallington Downs Estate vineyard was their retirement plan, it was the legacy they hoped to leave to their children and grandchildren.
It was replaced with the stress and frustration of a six-year battle for compensation.
It was 2004 when Trevor Bunting first bought the land in the Waipara Valley in Canterbury.
He came from a background of electrical work, but he loved a challenge, so he bought a tractor and started working up the clay soils.
It was hard going, taking up "lots and lots of hours", but fast forward 10 years and they were selling Pinot Gris and Pinot Noir grapes to local wineries, and had the thrill of bottling under their own Dallington Downs label.
They entered their own wines in competition to rave reviews, even winning awards, including a prestigious gold medal.
The future looked bright, until the day of a routine job to deal with a routine vineyard pest.
"We were having trouble with the painted apple moth," Trevor explains. "The contractor came down to spray a new product called Prodigy."
Prodigy is an insecticide widely used to control moths on apples, pears, grapes and kiwifruit.
The problem was the contractor wasn't spraying Prodigy, he was spraying Radiate, a powerful herbicide that kills weeds and other plant matter, including vines.
It was a huge mistake that was realised too late. Trish remembers that day all too clearly. "The sprayer knocked on the door and said, 'I think we've got a problem.'"
The couple ventured out to look at the vines. Trevor knew immediately something had gone seriously wrong.
"I was totally shocked. The vines were bending down and changing colour. They had severe stress. I said, 'What's gone wrong?’ and he said, 'I think I've put something on I shouldn't have.'"
They describe that day as soul destroying. Trish says she cried for what they thought they'd lost. But soon their thoughts turned to how this could have happened and how they might get compensation.
Trevor sent the product off for testing and discovered "it was the right plastic container, the right label, but the wrong contents".
He adds that at the time, he was certain that the managing director of Dow Agroscience, Pete Dryden, admitted full liability. "He looked me in the eye, he shook my hand and said, ‘Mr Bunting, no problem, just tell us what the bill is going to be and we'll fix you up.’”
The product had also been mistakenly sprayed on the neighbouring vines of Brent Knight, but only about a third of Brent's vineyard was affected, and he was happy to accept a payout straight away.
The vineyard of Trevor and Trish Bunting was completely destroyed, so they needed to be sure they’d be compensated in full as they had no other source of income. It was the start of a six-year fight, and they're still waiting.
In the meantime, Dow Agroscience merged with DuPont, and the agricultural division became a standalone company known as Corteva.
So dealings switched to Corteva, which handed over the issue to its insurers AIG. An offer of $750,000 was made.
That may sound like a lot but consider this. In 2013, a vineyard in Australia suffered a similar fate after a herbicide drifted onto vines from a neighbouring property.
The payout in that case was for $7 million for the loss of 8000 or so vines. The Buntings lost 10,500 vines.
They have spent years calculating the cost of getting themselves back to where they were after 10 years of hard work, and came up with the figure of just over $2 million.
They don't believe this is too much to ask of a multinational company worth billions of dollars that brought their small business to its knees in a single day.
The communication on the matter has caused no end of problems. At first they were told to salvage the damaged vines.
But inspections by specialists said the damage to the vines was too extensive for them to be resurrected.
They were then told to replant immediately to limit costs, but this too would have been futile.
While regrowth between the rows of vines had begun, nothing was growing directly underneath them because the herbicide spray had dripped down from the vines and wiped out the biomass essential for plant growth.
The disagreements continued as they discussed the cost of getting the vineyard back to where it was.
Trevor feels the company is not taking into account the fact that his was a boutique vineyard. This means certain activities are more cost-intensive, such as hand-picking the grapes.
There's also the fact that growth rates of vines are slower in the Waipara Valley than in many other parts of the country, as confirmed by other vineyards operating there, including the renowned Pegasus Bay.
With frustration mounting, the Buntings wanted Fair Go to take up their cause.
We knew the NZ Winegrowers Association supported Trevor's claim that the Buntings' vineyard should be put back to precisely the same state of production as if the damaged hadn't occurred.
So we approached Corteva and AIG for comment. Both companies said they couldn't discuss the case because the Buntings had started court proceedings.
However, legal advice suggests there are no legal reasons preventing them from engaging with us.
We wanted an explanation as to why they're offering an amount much lower than Trevor believes is right. All Corteva would say is that the Buntings' evidence is unsatisfactory.
They wouldn't explain why, or outline their own position regarding why $750,000 would be adequate.
The court case could take years, and the Buntings are running out of time to resurrect the vineyard that was once their pride and joy.
"We'll have to have lots of people helping us," Trish says, "because Trevor has a sore shoulder and I've had two knee replacements, so we can't do what we used to do. But he's determined he still wants to leave a legacy for the kids."
SHARE ME