Farming for Fun and Prophet
Only two months until it is time to plant your cow horn packed with dung! That is of course, if you are a practitioner of Biodynamic Farming.
This latest craze in vineyard management goes beyond organic to the controversial practice first espoused by Rudolf Steiner in the 20s. Biodynamics, as it would later be called, is a farming technique that chiefly relies on good sense sustainable practices. The debate comes from the further dependency on what to many observers is essentially magic.
I am a nay sayer. This should come as no surprise to any of you. I am a big fan of paying attention to farming practices, and those who adhere to biodynamics pay more attention than anyone else.
At least one study has found that biodynamic farms do have healthier soil than commercial farms. The study did not compare similar sized farms, nor were the crops the same. The kicker is that the biodynamic farm's soil was not healthier than similar organic farms.
As an example of why I have a hard time with some of the pratitioners, here is what Hugh Courtney, the director of the Josephine Porter Institute for Applied Biodynamics said recently "I would like to believe that the effort expended in New Orleans to apply the nine biodynamic preparations did indeed harmonize the energies in that particular location and served to block hurricane energies [in 2006]."
It would be reasonable to assume that this represents the fringe element of the movement, but in fact it embodies the core beliefs.
Biodynamics goes beyond making sure that the soil stays healthy, way beyond. The Cow Horn and Dung referenced at the top of the article is only one example.
At the center of biodynamic doctrine is a schedule of events that seem to be tied to astrology. This is explained by believers as being in tune with the natural rhythms of the universe, although some basic understanding of astronomy seems to be lacking:
The light of the sun, moon, planets and stars reaches the plants in regular rhythms. Planets don't have light of their own, it is light reflected from the sun*.
Cheap shots aside, does biodynamics work? Does it make better grapes, and therefore wine?
Yes and no, at least in my opinion. It is a wonderful thing to ensure that the soil, and by extension the vines, are as healthy as they can be. It is a good thing to think about the future when making farming decisions now. It is even a good thing to watch the cycle of life and respond to the needs of the vineyard.
Biodynamics therefore is a good thing. The more spiritual aspects are likely to be harmless at the least. Indeed, many subscribers to the techniques don't go the full extreme, electing instead to borrow what they like and ignore the rest.
The bigger question looms, are modern agricultural practices bad? I don't think they are inherently bad. These same practices have laid a bounty of food before the world like never before in history. What is bad is trading the future for profit today. And while many may be guilty of this, far from all are.
Sustainable farming practices seems a no brainer. Organic farming can be good. Biodynamic does no harm, and is at least as good as organic farming. Just don't expect me to pony up a few more dollars for a bottle of wine because your vineyard manager believes that the Moon lining up with Uranus is of dire consequence.
-------------
*Ok, so planets, being above absolute zero, do indeed cast electromagnetic radiation. Light however, is usually defined as those wavelengths we can see with our naked eye. The far-infrared and sub-millimeter radio ranges have not been shown to have any effect on plants. I am pretty sure this attempt at covering my bases is likely to only get me into more trouble, but I tried.
This latest craze in vineyard management goes beyond organic to the controversial practice first espoused by Rudolf Steiner in the 20s. Biodynamics, as it would later be called, is a farming technique that chiefly relies on good sense sustainable practices. The debate comes from the further dependency on what to many observers is essentially magic.
I am a nay sayer. This should come as no surprise to any of you. I am a big fan of paying attention to farming practices, and those who adhere to biodynamics pay more attention than anyone else.
At least one study has found that biodynamic farms do have healthier soil than commercial farms. The study did not compare similar sized farms, nor were the crops the same. The kicker is that the biodynamic farm's soil was not healthier than similar organic farms.
As an example of why I have a hard time with some of the pratitioners, here is what Hugh Courtney, the director of the Josephine Porter Institute for Applied Biodynamics said recently "I would like to believe that the effort expended in New Orleans to apply the nine biodynamic preparations did indeed harmonize the energies in that particular location and served to block hurricane energies [in 2006]."
It would be reasonable to assume that this represents the fringe element of the movement, but in fact it embodies the core beliefs.
Biodynamics goes beyond making sure that the soil stays healthy, way beyond. The Cow Horn and Dung referenced at the top of the article is only one example.
At the center of biodynamic doctrine is a schedule of events that seem to be tied to astrology. This is explained by believers as being in tune with the natural rhythms of the universe, although some basic understanding of astronomy seems to be lacking:
The light of the sun, moon, planets and stars reaches the plants in regular rhythms. Planets don't have light of their own, it is light reflected from the sun*.
Cheap shots aside, does biodynamics work? Does it make better grapes, and therefore wine?
Yes and no, at least in my opinion. It is a wonderful thing to ensure that the soil, and by extension the vines, are as healthy as they can be. It is a good thing to think about the future when making farming decisions now. It is even a good thing to watch the cycle of life and respond to the needs of the vineyard.
Biodynamics therefore is a good thing. The more spiritual aspects are likely to be harmless at the least. Indeed, many subscribers to the techniques don't go the full extreme, electing instead to borrow what they like and ignore the rest.
The bigger question looms, are modern agricultural practices bad? I don't think they are inherently bad. These same practices have laid a bounty of food before the world like never before in history. What is bad is trading the future for profit today. And while many may be guilty of this, far from all are.
Sustainable farming practices seems a no brainer. Organic farming can be good. Biodynamic does no harm, and is at least as good as organic farming. Just don't expect me to pony up a few more dollars for a bottle of wine because your vineyard manager believes that the Moon lining up with Uranus is of dire consequence.
-------------
*Ok, so planets, being above absolute zero, do indeed cast electromagnetic radiation. Light however, is usually defined as those wavelengths we can see with our naked eye. The far-infrared and sub-millimeter radio ranges have not been shown to have any effect on plants. I am pretty sure this attempt at covering my bases is likely to only get me into more trouble, but I tried.
1 Comments:
I think you covered your bases well. Paying attention is probably the fundamental of Rudolf Steiner's ideas, and if he pushes it beyond where most of us can or will follow, good for him. He was also no Luddite, being the Austrian equivalent of an MIT/CalTech graduate. His objection to "modern methods" would certainly come only from failing to really see what's happening with them.
Post a Comment
<< Home