Biodynamic Grape Growing: It Feels Good.
I think casting an askance eye at Biodynamic farming in the wine industry might be a case of …."that’s been done". For all the talk of Biodynamicism of late, there has been a decent chorus of folk who question it’s value beyond the organic approach inherent in it.
I got thinking about what biodynamic grape farming needs upon reading THIS STORY about a Australian grape farmer who says of their experience with biodynamic farming:
"The approach we are taking is to tread a
bit gently with the biodynamic applications and only really dipping our
toes in at the moment. We haven’t the ability to become a biodynamic
producer at this stage."
Fair enough. His conclusion so far?
"I think it is a direction we will continue with, because it feels good."
I’m a huge fan of feeling good. And if farming biodynamically is what gets you there, I say bury every dung filled steer horn you can get your hands on.
That said, you know what I’m really a fan of? Hard science.
This is what I’d like to see: A single vineyard on a consistent terroir, farmed traditionally in part, organically in part, and biodynamically in part. I’d like to see this happen over at least five harvests. Then I’d like to see statistical data on everything from grape yields, TA, pH, sugars, mold infestations, etc, etc. Then, I’d like to see five vintages of wines from each of the three vineyard sections. Then I’d like to see sensory evaluations of each wine as well as chemical tests of each wine. In other words, I’d like to see biodynamic farming really tested.
I don’t have anything against biodynamic farming. Really.Like I said, if it feels good, and doesn’t hurt me or anyone else, do it.
Asking for that kind of research seems like doing a clinical study when in fact rows of grapes in the same block can behave differently. I think people are put off by the ‘mystical approaches’ of biodynamic farming. Some biodynamic practices are old farmer almanac timing with the cycles. And would so many wineries go towards organic/biodynamic practices if they didn’t see an improvement in the vineyards? Perhaps we need to think further than the bottle and look at sustaining the land that gives us grapes.
The thing is, Tom, biodynamic farming has been tested. A friggin lot. It costs more – why would these guys do it if it costs so much more in labor?
Again, biodynamic farming was simply good farming way back when Steiner put it down on paper.
Why don’t you compare wines yourself? Compare, Porter Creek to Gallo Pinot and Chard. (They’re next to each other.) Compare Araujo’s wines to whomever they’re next to. Then do the wineries in Europe.
Contact Doug Braun at Presidio. He’s now certified biodynamic and can certainly direct you in the science of the matter. He talks at length about it. I’ll be seeing him on Sept. 9. I’ll have him read this. As always, thanks, Tom.
Actually tom, what people REALLY need to test is a vineyard that has been farmed BioD completely, and then a vineyard that has been farmed BioD but without the cow’s horn, the deer bladder, and the stirring of solutions 50 times when the moon is waxing.
No doubt Biodynamic farming gives better results. Winemakers aren’t stupid — they wouldn’t do something that didn’t yield better results.
My problem is that so few of them seem willing to “separate the bullshit from the biod” and drop all the new age crap that has no (or completely incorrect) scientific basis.
Gedanken zum biodynamischen Weinbau
Interessante Gedanken zum bio-dynamischen Weinbau mach sich Tom Wark in seinem Fermentation Blog (englisch):er ist der Ansicht, dass bio-dynamischer Weinbau zwar nicht schadet, sich vielleicht sogar gut anfühlt, aber überzeugt davon ist er
I’d like too see such an experiment too, and I wonder why nobody really bothered doing so. Or maybe I know, because for many, biodinamic is more a faith than an agricoltural practice. Faith of course doesn’t need scientific explanation, and of course for many people “it feels good”.
As an agronomist, with a strong background in scientific research, I would rather feel good looking at some comparative results.
The reason that Biodinamic is good because the people that adopte it aren’t stupid, or even that their wines are good, is rather a weak one. It doesn’t take into account at least a couple of things: 1) those we adopt biodinamic are certainly more passion driven people, working harder, than the average wine producer. The result is often a good wine, but my personal opinion is that they would have been good makers anyway, just because they are good. 2) it certain that biodinamic wines are experiencing growing popularity now, expecially at the moment when many organic product hit the mass market. It is a good marketing tool to be a biodinamic grower today. You can’t just rule out this fact and ignore that this doesn’t help the grower to choose this approach.
I attended a sustainability conference in Napa last year at which John Reganold, a soil science professor from WSU, spoke. He was involved in a study at McNab Ranch comparing soil and winegrape quality in biodynamic and organic vineyards. Here is a link to the report http://www.vineatrust.org/news_events/pdfs/AJEVreeve2005.pdf .
One outcome of the study that I recall was that worms seemed to prefer the biodynamic soils.
I wish a non-organic/biodynamic vineyard would have been included as part of the study.
Whether you believe with the biodynamic philosophy or not, I appreciate the fact that these grapegrowers are trying to be good stewards of their land.
I attended a sustainability conference in Napa last year at which John Reganold, a soil science professor from WSU, spoke. He was involved in a study at McNab Ranch comparing soil and winegrape quality in biodynamic and organic vineyards. Here is a link to the report http://www.vineatrust.org/news_events/pdfs/AJEVreeve2005.pdf .
One outcome of the study that I recall was that worms seemed to prefer the biodynamic soils.
I wish a non-organic/biodynamic vineyard would have been included as part of the study.
Whether you believe with the biodynamic philosophy or not, I appreciate the fact that these grapegrowers are trying to be good stewards of their land.
No doubt Biodynamic farming gives better results. Winemakers aren’t stupid — they wouldn’t do something that didn’t yield better results.
How can you definitively say this? As Gianpaolo suggested, perhaps these winemakers are just making really good wine because of their passion, and they would be regardless of whether they farm BioDynamically, Organically, or Chemically.
I had some friends that tried some wine that had no sulfites added, and they said it was a million times better than any wine they’ve tried with the sulfites. I tried to explain to them that you can’t taste the sulfites in wine because it’s such a tiny concentration of the whole bottle of liquid. But they insisted there was a difference. I tired to tell them if there was, it was simply because the wine was better, whether because of the grapes or the winemaker’s processes, but they wouldn’t hear it.
The problem with the assertions that biodynamic methods make “better wines” is that there is no way to quantify what “better” means. Are biodynamically produced wines actually healthier, that is are they “better” for people than non-bio wines? Do they taste better? Are they more authentic? (And if you don’t subscribe to the notion of terroir that won’t mean anything anyway.) Do they have more integrity? If you attend the Bio-Diversity conferences in New York (i went to the ones in ’04 and ’06), you will indeed come away with the impression that many people make excellent wines under the sway of the biodynamic method. But there are also biodynamic wines that are over-oaked, over-tannic, austere and fruitless. Completely adequate sustainable practices existed long before bio-dynamism became such a fad. Great winemakers don’t need Steiner’s philosophy and mumbo-jumbo techniques because they have always paid acute attention to detail in the vineyard and the winery; that’s how great wines get made.
O Ca’ del Solo Mio:Randall Grahm Escapes from the Big House
Got to get back to the land and set my soul free . . . This bit of wine news dates back to the end of July, but it only came to my attention when the Los Angeles Times got
I think a huge chunk of the reasoning behind biodynamic farming is just the familiarization of the farmer with the Earth. Rather than treating the soil and vines as a means to end, biodynamic farmers see the terroir as a life. Because, well…its alive. I just found out that one of my favorite Italian whites is made biodynamically, Alois Lageder pinot grigio (their single vineyards are incredible), which really didn’t come to much of a surprise to me. Whatever seemingly ridiculous acts are done by these eccentrics are moot due to the fact that they’re learning about their crop on an intimate level; that could only lead to better wine.