MARYLAND HOP

GROWERS GUIDE
A Progress Report on the 2016-2017
Growing Season and Summary of Best
Practices for Growing Hops in Maryland

Flying Dog Brewery and the University of Maryland’s

College of Agriculture and Natural Resources:
Revolutionizing the Future of Beer-Centric Agriculture
 This past summer, Flying Dog Brewery formalized a
partnership with the University of Maryland to work
side-by-side with its College of Agriculture and Natural
Resources on the future of beer-centric agriculture
in the region. To start, the focus is on hops.

The following is a progress report on the first year’s

research and analysis of 24 hop varieties planted at the
Western Maryland Research and Education Center
in Keedysville and a guide of best practices
for establishing and maintaining
a hop yard in Maryland.
FROM FLYING DOG CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER MATT BROPHY AND BREWMASTER BEN CLARK:
What appealed to us most about this
partnership with the University of
Maryland is the practical approach to
beer agriculture. Growing hops in this
agricultural climate is unique, so
a continued commitment to best
management practices is crucial to the
continued growth and development of
local hop farms.
In that same vein, it’s also imperative
that Maryland hops meet the same
quality standards that we see every
year when we go out to harvest in
MATT BROPHY Yakima Valley. In our highly creative
CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
and competitive marketplace, local is
great, but quality reigns supreme.
Our commitment to UMD includes an
ongoing evaluation of each year’s
harvest, from profile analysis to
guidance on processing and storage
to retain quality. And because there’s
no better way to truly evaluate a hop
than to put it in a beer, we will continue
to release small-batch beers brewed
with these hop varieties (the first being
our Field Notes Pale Ale released this
March). Releasing these experimental
beers takes this project one step
BEN CLARK further, exposing our fan base to the
BREWMASTER full potential of Maryland hops.
The end goal of our work with the
University of Maryland is to accelerate
both the supply and demand for quality
local hops, from farmers to brewers to
the end consumer. Now that year one
is on the books, we look forward
to continuing to grow
(pun absolutely intended).
FROM UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND EXTENSION AGENT BRYAN BUTLER:
The premise of this entire project is to
provide non-biased, research-based
information on what it takes to
produce quality hops in this region.
While other institutions on the East
Coast are studying hops, no one is
tracking data specific to this climate.
It was (and continues to be) critical
that the data collected on each hop
variety is realistic and relevant to
growers. This guide not only
summarizes the first year of our trials,
but also answers the question I receive
BRYAN BUTLER most from potential growers, which is
EXTENSION AGENT
simply “what do I do?”
The answer is anything but simple.
This area’s hot, humid and pest-rich
environment presents unique
challenges to hop production and is
unlike traditional hop-growing regions,
like the Pacific Northwest, Germany
and New Zealand. The research
compiled through this partnership
will help us determine possible
solutions for those challenges,
making hops production an
economically viable and sound
practice for local farmers in Maryland.
The following summary was generated
from what we learned in year
one, and will be updated annually
as we continue to learn the
ins and outs of hop production in
Maryland. This guide is intended
to be less a recipe for production
and more a menu for growers to select
what works in their own
operations with ideas for solutions
to common challenges that limit
production in this region. To give
potential growers the most accurate
look at what it takes, this guide
concludes with a glimpse into a year
in the life of growing hops.
PROGRESS REPORT
HOP VARIETIES STUDIED
University of Maryland established a replicated variety trial of 24
different hop varieties, all of which were harvested and processed
for the first time this fall.
The first 12 varieties, planted in 2016, were selected based on
discussions with academic and industry experts on what varieties
local brewers may be interested in or were already using, so there
would be less resistance to trying locally produced hops.
Consideration was also given to varieties that were already
being grown around the state in very small quantities, which
had anecdotally performed well or at least persisted in the
Maryland climate.

Crystal AlphAroma Nugget

Mt. Hood Cascade Sorachi Ace
Mt. Ranier Centennial Southern Cross
Chinook Tahoma
Ultra
The second 12 varieties were planted in 2017. This expansion came
at the request of existing Maryland brewers and hops growers.
There were concerns from the industry that we were missing some
important varieties that had potential for this region. As a result,
growers and brewers were asked to participate in an informal survey
to recommend varieties with the most market potential that might
also be suited to Maryland growing conditions:
Canadian Red Vine Multihead
Galena Southern Brewer
Glacier Teamaker
Amallia Willamette
Neo 1 Vojvodina
Newport Zeus
Each variety was replicated three times and data was collected on
fertility and irrigation; disease, insect and pest management; harvest
timing; levels of acids and oils in the hops; and any other unique
aspects of the hop’s profile.

2017 PLANTING AND GROWING SEASON

The 2017 season was not atypical as Maryland weather goes. Heat
and humidity generally abound, which set the stage for intense
insect and disease development.
April warmed up very quickly and the plants grew at a very rapid
rate causing some management issues with crowning, stringing
the yard and trailing the bines to the string. Things dried out in
June, requiring close attention to watering and a tightening up
of the irrigation schedule after a wet May.
July was quite wet with 7.5 inches of rain, which carried us into
our harvest season of August and early September. Harvest did
not see large amounts of rainfall but had a large number of days
with precipitation, which made keeping the cones disease free
very challenging.
HARVEST
This project is not only about growing an excellent hop in
sufficient quantities. The hops must be useful to craft brewers in
Maryland, so it is also about demonstrating scalable technologies
to provide a high-quality product in a useable form to brewers. This
meant harvest and post-harvest handling had to be an integral
component to this experiment.
One of the most critical components was the timing of the
harvest, which needed to be performed consistently and within a
narrow window of time to ensure maximum quality and comparison
of varieties. To facilitate this, Flying Dog’s investment in the
partnership included joint funding of a mobile harvester. The
harvester ensured that each variety was harvested in a timely
and consistent fashion, and ensured the data collected on each
variety regarding yield was (and will continue to be) consistent.
Harvest of the 24 varieties stretched from July 31 to September 12.
TOTAL TOTAL # OF BINES PREDICTED WT
VARIETY WEIGHT (g) WEIGHT (lbs) HARVESTED (lbs)/900 BINES
AlphAroma 2385 5.3 18 263
Amallia 270 0.6 15 36
Canadian Red Vine 7375 16.3 18 813
Cascade 1235 2.7 18 136
Centennial 550 1.2 15 73
Chinook 390 0.9 16 48
Crystal 980 2.2 17 114
Galena 2800 6.2 18 309
Glacier 3500 7.7 18 386
Mt. Hood 1090 6.6 18 120
Mt. Ranier 150 0.3 16 19
Multihead 680 1.5 13 104
Neo 1 0 0 14 0
Newport 3000 1.3 18 333
Nugget 815 1.8 17 95
Sorachi Ace 255 0.6 14 36
Southern Brewer 2850 6.3 18 315
Southern Cross 1655 3.6 18 182
Tahoma 675 1.5 16 84
Teamaker 2060 4.5 18 227
Ultra 150 0.3 18 17
Vojvodina 2000 4.4 18 220
Willamette 150 0.3 18 17
Zeus 4235 9.3 18 467
PROCESSING
Once harvested, the hops were processed on site at the research
facility. The hop cones were placed in the oast immediately following
harvest and dried within 48 hours to between 8% and 12% moisture.
They were refrigerated in sealed bags until they could be ground up
in the hammer mill and then run directly into the pelletizer. Special
attention was paid to not let the pellets heat above 110 degrees
during pelletization. Once pelletized, they were vacuum sealed
and placed in the freezer for storage.
HOP ANALYSIS
The goal for this research is twofold: To collect actionable data for
new and existing hop farmers and to provide craft brewers with
analysis on each hop variety that is in-line with what they receive
from larger producers around the world. This includes a breakdown
of alpha acids, beta acids and overall oils in each variety:

2017 HOPS VARIETY ANALYSIS

20 2.5
18
16 2.0
14
ACID UNITS

OILS UNITS
12 1.5
10
8 1.0
6
4 0.5
2
0 0.0
A NE DE K AL A ER D D T T E ER SS A R A S
M O N I O EA OR GE AC M KE IN EU
VI CA O ST LE AC O
RO D S IN RY A L . HO ITH WP UG HI REW CR HO MA OD Z
HA RE CA CH C G G MT UL
N
E N AC B N
R TA EA JV
LP N M R
O ER HE
N T VO
A IA S T
D H U
N
A UT SO TOTAL ALPHA TOTAL BETA OILS

CA SO

* Please note that the yields on Amallia, Centennial, Mt. Rainer, Neo 1, Ultra
and Willamette were insufficient for outside lab analysis.

In November, Flying Dog received the processed hops and

within two weeks, completed aroma evaluation trials. Brewmaster
Ben Clark made hop teas, steeping each variety in a base light
lager, to evaluate the potential aroma profile of each hop.
The hops were separated into four groups based on yield, with
Group A having the highest yield and Group D having the lowest.
To prevent sensory overload, one group was evaluated per day
and each hop was ranked within its group (with 1 being the best
aroma profile and 5 being the worst).

** Please note that Centennial and Ultra were combined during pelletization in order for Flying Dog to
receive enough volume to evaluate. Also note that the yields on Amallia, Chinook, Mt. Rainer, Neo 1,
Sorachi Ace, Ultra and Willamette were insufficient for processing and not evaluated by Flying Dog.
FLYING DOG’S AROMA EVALUATION
FLYING DOG BREWMASTER BEN CLARK
ON THE TOP HOP IN EACH GROUP:
• Vojvodina: With a fresh mint and melon aroma, this was a
little different than any of the standard hops we’ve used before.
It’s an intriguing profile that could add a light flavor element to a
blonde or wheat. Aside from Noble hops, there aren’t a lot of
hops that can add subtle elements like that.

• Newport: This was more reminiscent of a traditional West

Coast hop variety, so the people who weren’t drawn to the
uniqueness of Vojvodina ranked this the highest.
• Southern Cross: In my opinion, this was the best overall. You’re
seeing the same notes in this hop that you’re seeing in the new,
exciting varieties that people are latching onto right now
(Mosaic, Galaxy) with big juicy fruit.
• Glacier: This hop had the most aggressive aroma
with potent resin notes.
• Southern Brewer: Even more so than Newport hops, this was
the one that immediately made me think that it was actually
a West Coast hop.
• Mt. Hood: Given the profiles of the other hops in this group,
this was the clear winner. It had a herbal and spicy profile,
which was reminiscent of traditional Noble hop profiles.

Those six varieties were evaluated again – on a separate day to

prevent sensory fatigue – and Glacier, Southern Brewer, Southern
Cross and Vojvodina were determined to be the strongest from
both an aroma profile and yield standpoint.
From there, Clark performed a separate bittering evaluation of
Nugget, Galena and Zeus hops – all of which showed the most
potential to be used as bittering hops – by brewing three variations
on Flying Dog’s pilot brewing systems. The hops chosen for the
flavor and aroma additions in each of these beers, which were
all pale ales, were determined by a combination of both yield and
aroma profile. Basically, Flying Dog brewed with what they had to
make the most out of the first year’s harvest.
ALSO FROM FLYING DOG BREWMASTER BEN CLARK:
• UMD Trial One (Nugget evaluation): Nugget is a traditional
dual-purpose hop that we primarily use for bittering, and the
profile and specs aligned with what we typically see from
Nugget hops from other regions. Southern Cross was added
during the whirlpool and as a dry hop during conditioning.
• UMD Trial Two (Galena evaluation): Galena had a cohumulone
level that was double what we saw from the Nugget hops, so it
had a higher potential to have a more intense and harsher
bitterness. We added it at the same rate as Nugget to see if
that would be the case, but we didn’t end up seeing the
increase in harsh bitterness that we expected. Vojvodina
was added during the whirlpool and as a dry hop
during conditioning.
• UMD Trial Three (Zeus evaluation): Zeus is another variety we’re
familiar with because it has the same genetic makeup as
Columbus. Because this had the highest yield of the three, we
wanted to utilize all of our top aroma hops. Glacier was added
to the whirlpool and this beer was dry hopped with Glacier,
Southern Cross, Southern Brewer and Vojvodina.
FINISHED PRODUCT
After evaluating each beer at all stages of the process, including the
finished product, the third trial – featuring Glacier, Southern Cross,
Southern Brewer and Vojvodina – was released as Field Notes Pale
Ale in Flying Dog’s tasting room in early March.

Because there’s no better way to truly evaluate a hop than to brew

with it, Flying Dog plans on producing at least one limited
release featuring hops grown by UMD per year.
Here’s a more in-depth look at Field Notes from
Flying Dog Brewmaster Ben Clark:
• All of the malt we used was also grown at the Western
Maryland Research and Education Center in Keedysville.
Synergy and Scala were malted as a brewer’s pale two-row
malt, essentially a brewer’s base malt. Because we wanted
to showcase the hops, we weren’t looking for a ton of
malt character.
• 5.6% ABV and 35 IBU are both pretty standard for
an American Pale Ale.
• With the whirlpool addition of Glacier for flavor, we were
looking for Noble hop notes of herbs, spice and grass.
• We used a clean-fermenting American Ale yeast strain that
would not throw off any fruity notes that would interfere
with the hops.
• The dry hop was 1.25 lbs per barrel, which is on the higher
side for a pale ale, but not totally out of the question. Here
we were looking for a combination of juicy fruit, resin
and citrus.

LOOKING AHEAD TO 2018

The key to 2018 is having another set of data to compare
everything we learned in 2017. For example, will Vojvodina – a
strong contender in both profile and yield – have the same
harvest and characteristics? Will changes in Maryland’s
hard-to-predict climate significantly change these hop’s harvest?
Now that we have 2017 data as that control, it’s time to see if the
data lines up year after year. It’s also important to consider that it
takes a hop plant at least three years to mature, so the yields from
all varieties should increase each year.
NOTES
BEST PRACTICES
ESTABLISHMENT OF A MARYLAND HOP YARD
Soil and Site Preparation: It is critical in our climate that you select
the best site possible. This will help to reduce the negative effects –
extreme heat, high humidity and erratic rainfall – of Maryland
weather. The site should have well-drained soil, full sun, good air
circulation and accessibility and clear of frost pockets. Soil should
be tested at least one year in advance of planting to ensure time
to develop a nutrient management plan and allow time to make
the proper adjustments. Pay particular attention to pH, Phosphorus
and Potassium. Be aware of the previous crops, potential herbicide
carryover and the existing weed population. For example, perennials
need to be controlled prior to planting to help reduce weed
challenges. Sod establishment in the fall prior to the year of
planting will help facilitate future hop yard growth, prevent
soil erosion and suppress weeds. Tall fescue should be planted
between rows in spring or fall of previous year. Availability
of water is needed for irrigation.

Variety selection: This is the primary goal of the partnership

between Flying Dog and UMD. We are screening 24 varieties in an
effort to identify varieties that might be better suited to be grown
in Maryland while still possessing the characteristics desired for
brewers to make high-quality beer.

Planting: April through early May

Fertility: All nutrients and soil pH, except for Nitrogen, should be
addressed based on soil test results prior to planting. Nitrogen
should be applied the first week after planting, three weeks later and
then three weeks later at a total of 75 pounds of Nitrogen per acre.

Weed control: Apply Glyphosate pre-plant to rows to burn down all

weeds prior to planting. Use burndown product as needed to control
weeds in the row throughout the first season. Avoid burning hops
with drift from burndown products.
Irrigation: Regular and consistent watering is essential. Plants can
grow 10 inches a day and need water but should not have wet feet.
This means that you want to maintain adequate moisture in the soil
profile but do not want puddling of water on the surface or for the
soil in the hop yard to have a “muddy” texture. Irrigation should be
run as often as four days a week during hot and dry periods.

Trellis: Trellises need to be well anchored and able to support a

cable 18-feet high to allow the hops to reach their full potential.
Posts should be 4 feet in the ground with plants spaced 3½ feet
by 12 feet. It is important that your row spacing is suited to your
equipment and that, when the plants are fully mature, operations
in the hop yard can continue without damaging the plants.

Training/Pruning: Use one string per plant and encourage all

the growth of the plant to climb the string. This will help the
plant establish a strong root system and may help to produce
a light crop the first season.

Pest Control: Weekly Integrated Pest Management (IPM) scouting

is a must for successful hops production in Maryland. Rapid
deployment of control measures can make all the difference
between success and failure of a new planting. This consists
of walking the rows observing overall condition of your plants,
looking at vigor, color of foliage, discoloration or browning of
leaves and presence of insects or mites. It is important to be
examining both the upper and lower surfaces of the leaves with
a magnifying glass or hand lens to see mites or early infestations
of Leafhoppers. Major pest issues in order of impact on our current
planting include: Downy Mildew, Leafhoppers, Mites, Alternaria
Cone Disorder, Fusarium Cone Tip Blight and Japanese Beetles.
MANAGEMENT OF AN ESTABLISHED MARYLAND HOP YARD
Optimal Fertility: First week of April, fourth week of April, third
week of May, second week of June with a total of 180 lbs.
Nitrogen per acre.

Weed control: February Glyphosate plus Chateau, spring burndown

Irrigation: Regular and consistent watering is essential and follows

the same guidelines as establishing a new hop yard.

Spring Pruning: This can be done mechanically or with a desiccant.

Either way, the critical objective is to completely remove all green
tissue above the soil to encourage the plant to push up new strong
bines from the crown.

Training/Pruning: Two strings per plant, selecting two or three

healthy strong undamaged bines per string.

Pest Control: Weekly Integrated Pest Management (IPM) scouting

is a must for successful hops production in Maryland. The same
pest control measures taken to establish a hop yard are crucial
to maintain a successful crop year-to-year.
SAMPLE HOP YARD SCHEDULE
The schedule below is based on the IPM scouting and control
measures taken in the hop yard at Keedysville:
• 2/15/17 – CHATEAU (6OZ/A) + GRAMOXONE (1PT/A) ON 2016 PLANTING ONLY
• 3/24/17 – CHAMP (1.3PT/A)
• 3/29/17 – ROUNDUP POWERMAX (1QT/A) ON NEW HOPS YARD TO KILL FESCUE STRIPS FOR TILLAGE
• 3/31/17 – 2017 HOPS ARRIVED, TRANSPLANTED TO LARGER POTS
• 4/03/17 – DRENCHED WITH RIDOMIL GOLD SL (8OZ/A RATE - .8OZ/10GAL, 5 GAL TREATS 50 PLANTS) AND FERTILIZED WITH
UREA AT A RATE OF 50LB N/A (EACH REP 50SQ.FT. 1.84OZ/REP)
• 4/10/17 – SCYTHE @ 100GPA @5% SOLUTION TO BURN DOWN EARLY GROWTH
• 4/20/17 – PLANTED 2017 HOPS TRIAL
• 4/21/17 – STRUNG ALL HOPS AND FERTILIZED WITH UREA AT A RATE OF 50LB N/A (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 5/02/17 – PHOSTROL (2.5PT/A)
• 5/09/17 – APPLIED DAKOTA HERBICIDE TO 2017 PLANTING
• 5/10/17 – APPLIED SCYTHE HERBICIDE SPOT SPRAY TO 2016 PLANTING
• 5/12/17 – FERTILIZED WITH UREA AT A RATE OF 50LB N/A (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 5/15/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) AND RANMAN @ 2.5OZ/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 5/22/17 – APPLIED PHOSTROL (2.5PT/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 5/25/17 – APPLIED SCYTHE HERBICIDE SPOT SPRAY TO 2017 PLANTING
• 5/26/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 6/01/17 – REMOVED LOWER FOLIAGE (2016 PLANTING)
• 6/03/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) + PRISTINE (28OZ/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 6/08/17 – APPLIED BRIGADE WSB (16OZ/A) + RANMAN (2.5OZ/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 6/14/17 – APPLIED SCYTHE HERBICIDE SPOT SPRAY (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 6/16/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) + PRISTINE (28OZ/A) + ACRAMITE 50WS (1.33LB/A)
• 6/22/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) + PHOSTROL (2.5PT/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 6/29/17 – APPLIED BRIGADE WSB (16OZ/A) + RANMAN (2.5OZ/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 7/07/17 – APPLIED MALATHION 5 (1PT/A) + PHOSTROL (2.5PT/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 7/14/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 7/20/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) + PHOSTROL (2.5PT/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
• 7/27/17 – APPLIED M PEDE (2% SOLUTION) + PHOSTROL (2.5PT/A) (2016 AND 2017 PLANTINGS)
NOTES
NOTES
NOTES
 IN PARTNERSHIP WITH

AGNR.UMD.EDU
FLYINGDOGBREWERY.COM