Public Comment on the Proposed Llano Uplift and Hickory Sands District AVAs

The Llano Uplift petition advances geology, soils, climate, and groundwater as distinguishing features. Its geological and soil case is particularly significant. The distinction is not that granite exists only inside the proposed Llano Uplift or that limestone is absent from it. Rather, the petition describes many of the proposed AVA’s soils as derived from weathered granite and gneiss and states that its soils are slightly acidic, in contrast to the mostly alkaline, limestone-derived soils found in surrounding regions. Notice No. 243 summarizes the broader distinction as soils derived primarily from granite rather than limestone.

My reporting provides site-specific examples of how physical growing conditions operate in commercial vineyards within the proposed Llano Uplift but outside the proposed Hickory Sands District.

Perissos Vineyard and Winery, in Burnet County, is listed in the petition materials as within the proposed Llano Uplift but outside Hickory Sands. Dalton Humphreys of Perissos told me that the vineyard site was chosen intentionally for its decomposed-granite gravel soil. He described that soil as very low in organic matter, approximately neutral to slightly acidic, and extremely well drained, with a structure that allows roots to grow deeply and spread through the soil.

I offer that observation for its appropriate, limited purpose. One vineyard does not establish the character of a 2,096-square-mile AVA. Perissos does, however, provide a commercial-vineyard example outside Hickory Sands that is consistent with the petition’s broader evidence concerning granite-derived soils and their practical significance to vineyard siting and growing conditions.

Additional reporting from vineyards outside Hickory Sands illustrates how physical conditions within the proposed Llano Uplift can have direct viticultural consequences while varying from site to site. At Uplift Vineyard, winemaker Claire Richardson described intense heat, limited irrigation water, and small changes in slope that alter runoff enough to require different irrigation treatment within individual blocks. She described instances in which upper and lower portions of the same block are managed differently because of water movement across the site.

At Torr Na Lochs, Blake DeBerry described a higher site of decomposed granite and sand among exposed granite outcrops. In describing a late-March 2026 freeze, he reported that Torr Na Lochs experienced less severe and shorter-duration freezing conditions than nearby Perissos. He attributed the difference in part to cold-air drainage from the elevated site and heat retained by the exposed granite. I include that account only as a site-specific example of how local topography can affect vineyard conditions within the proposed Llano Uplift, not as evidence of an AVA-wide frost-protection advantage.

Together, these observations provide practical examples of how geology, topography, and water conditions within the proposed Llano Uplift can translate into vineyard-management consequences while varying from site to site. They do not establish the regional character of the proposed AVA; that broader case rests on the petition’s mapped geological, soil, climate, groundwater, and boundary evidence.

That geographic context is useful because Hickory Sands is proposed entirely within the northwest corner of the Llano Uplift, while Perissos, Uplift Vineyard, and Torr Na Lochs are commercial vineyards within the proposed parent AVA but outside Hickory Sands. The petition’s vineyard table identifies all three outside the proposed Hickory Sands boundary. The examples therefore provide site-specific evidence from outside the proposed nested district rather than asking the Hickory Sands evidence to carry the viticultural case for the larger Llano Uplift.

The Llano Uplift petition also identifies substantial characteristics shared with the existing Texas Hill Country AVA. Notice No. 243 describes both as having rolling hills, canyons, and valleys and notes that elevations within the proposed Llano Uplift fall within the range found in the existing Texas Hill Country AVA. The Hill Country’s soils also include granite- and sandstone-derived materials as well as limestone. The distinction advanced by the petition is therefore one of regional predominance rather than a complete geological or topographic break.

Those shared characteristics are relevant to TTB’s separate question of whether the proposed Llano Uplift, if established, should remain within the Texas Hill Country AVA. The petition’s distinguishing geology and soils support recognition of a more specific grape-growing region while its shared characteristics provide a basis for retaining it within the broader Texas Hill Country.