Some observations about biodynamics

1. Is ‘naturalness’ a valid and important concept in wine?
It is the most important thing in wine today. If a wine is not natural, the direct product of nature, it is an artificial, industrial construct. Perhaps we should distinguish then between natural wine (one that has no additives or subtractions) and those homogenous products which are highly manipulated and made to be consistent year after year at the expense of individuality or identity.

2. Does the BD approach follow through from the vineyard to impact what goes on in the cellar?
Of course, biodynamics is a holistic philosophy and extends to all procedures and activities in the vineyard. It is fundamentally important to preserve the unique flavour of the grapes. Biodynamics also therefore goes hand-in-hand with minimal interventions in the winery: one would, for example, expect wild yeast ferment, one would not expect filtering, fining, acidification or chaptalisation. As Paul Strang writes of Didier Barral: “He scorns the modern bottling plant, deploring the use of filters and pumps which interfere with the natural qualities of the wine. All you need is a north wind and an old moon.” It is important to preserve the flavours conferred by nature. Joly talks about the winemaker being Nature’s assistant, whilst Louis Barruol – quoted in The New France by Andrew Jefford remarked: “I don’t like the word winemaker. It doesn’t mean anything to me. You make shoes; you don’t make wine. I prefer to call myself a “wine helper” You help the wine make itself. That’s how I consider my job. That’s the way to keep a low profile – under nature, under the climate, under the fruit. Wine is a great gift.”

3. Is there a benefit to BD over what can be achieved by organics plus composting? If so, what?

Evidence has suggested that it is very difficult to scientifically prove an immediate tangible benefit of biodynamics over and above organics. Most growers who practise biodynamics are content to allow the process to bed in and to allow the vineyard to find its own equilibrium. And it is, by definition, a gradual process; vines which are reliant on chemicals almost have to go “cold turkey” before coming out the other side. Luc de Conti (“the soil is a cadaver”) estimates fifteen years as a minimum requirement before the soil rids itself the last remnants of nitrates and other chemical residues.  However, those who are most in a position to judge, the growers themselves, have noticed a distinct improvement in the health and the quality of the grapes and ultimately in the wines themselves.

4. Are there elements of BD that people can adopt and see benefit from without taking on board the whole package of treatments and timings?
The important thing is to adapt biodynamics to one’s own requirements. Just as the medicine or treatment for one individual would not necessarily work for another so each vineyard has an identity and its own particular set of needs. Soil which is already rich in humus will not need the same applications of manure as soil which is not . Homeopathic medicine treats the individual not just the disease and the vigneron must learn what is necessary rather than doing things by rote. The first step is to eliminate the vine’s dependence on chemicals. Secondly, one should always look for natural solutions to problems (pest control, for example). Thirdly, create the preconditions by setting up the vineyard in such a way to move from intensive, impersonal agriculture. Don’t use tractors with heavy treads which compact the soil; allow grass, weeds and flowers to grow between the vines, stimulate microbial activity. Biodynamics is about creating a healthy environment for the vines to flourish.

One should be wary about creating vast divisions between conventional, organic and biodynamic viticulture as certain of the categories overlap at the margins. I’m not sure any grower wants to put toxic chemicals in the soil, although some may not be aware of the potency of these chemicals. Lutte raisonée, as it is called in France, involves a more considered use of treatments, but it is a vague term. Organic viticulture is generally proscriptive although growers who apply a proactive form of organics are often referred to as biodynamic. Some growers seek certification to legitimize their activities whilst others are content to let actions speak louder than a sheet of paper. We shouldn’t be too hung up on labels. As the irrepressible Luc de Conti says: “I believe in the work in the vineyard and some of the biodynamic treatment. As for the moon – they can keep it!”

5. How did you first get into BD?
Intensive farming is an abuse of a natural resource. I strongly believe that you can’t take more out of the land than you give. Chemicals pumped into the soil take a generation to dissipate. Without a clear philosophy underpinning it organic viticulture manages to be both precise in its prescription but wooly in its intention. What made biodynamics attractive to me was this implied moral imperative is that it suggests a programme for life – it links vineyard with the winery with the food we eat and the way we live. It is a cosmic alibi.

Thirdly, although one chuckles at the more abstruse elements of biodynamics it is salutary to remember how our lives are governed by nature and natural rhythms. It is said that there are more accidents during a full moon; in southern Germany operations are supposedly cancelled during the föhn winds. Wines respond positively (or negatively) to atmospheric pressure. All supermarkets (bar Waitrose) hold their press tastings on fruit or flower days according to the Maria Thun calendar. I know many gardeners who swear by the calendar and determine all their activity by it. André Ostertag remarked notably that he couldn’t understand why biodynamics worked, but it had made an appreciable difference. There are more things in heaven and earth...

How much efficacy can people achieve with just the treatments and not the timings?
You would have to conduct hundreds of controlled experiments (and, in the vineyard, unlike the laboratory, nothing is ever totally controlled) to reach a conclusion. The point about working to cycles and rhythms is that it becomes like a timetable; nature is giving the framework. Would the treatments work per se if they were applied in the wrong astrological sign? Do they work at all? It is partly a matter of faith and partly interpretation. Ritual is extremely important (in religion, in Japanese tea ceremonies) – it is part of the dynamic of biodynamics.

21-year study conducted by the FiBL Institute in Switzerland compared the agronomic and ecological performance of biodynamic, organic and two conventional systems. “In regards to soil aggregate stability, soil pH, humus formation, soil calcium, microbial biomass, and faunal biomass (earthworms and arthropods), the biodynamic system was superior even to the organic system, which in turn had superior results over the conventional systems. With the significant increase in microbial diversity in the biodynamic and organic systems, there was a significant associated decrease in metabolic quotient, indicating a greater ability to use organic material for plant growth.”

6. What do you think about Nicolas Joly’s views on the effects of electrical currents on wines?
7. Is biodynamics metaphysical, involving a realm outside the scope of scientific physical measurement?
If we were to take Steiner’s writings at face value, we would be probably be entertaining a host of unverifiable and zany geomantic notions. The overall concept is, however, straightforward: Biodynamics has its basis in a spiritual world-view (anthroposophy) , treats farms as unified and individual organisms, emphasizing balancing the holistic development and interrelationship of the soil, plants, animals as a closed, self-nourishing system – Only connect is not just an mantra in EM Forster’s Howard’s End – it is the idea that underpins biodynamics. You reap what you sew.

Proving that biodynamics yields better quality wines than conventional viticulture is difficult; good taste, after all, is not calibrated by science.  Biodynamics is also about nurturing biodiversity and, as such, has an ethical dimension. It is about the vine finding its own natural balance. This is not metaphysical as much as practical and highly desirable; a healthy vineyard where the vine can co-exist with plants, flowers, insects, birds and so forth is better than an arid monoculture. The end is not to make wine at all costs.

Now take a walk on the wild side. If the preparations 500 & 501 raise a skeptical smile then treatments 502 – 508 will cause eyebrows to disappear into the hairline. Compost preparations, used for preparing compost, employ herbs, flowers and roots which are frequently used in medicinal remedies. Each compost preparation is designed to guide a particular decomposition process in the composting mass. Then take pest control. Joly’s response to an infestation of rabbits was to burn a rabbit skin each year, the time of the burning determined by the alignment of the planets. The rabbits never returned - they obviously knew what was good for them. One may see the result, but one cannot prove cause-and-effect here. This treatment also reveals one of the more unusual aspects of biodynamics, that is the importance of astrology. This pseudo-science is of certain significance to those that practice biodynamic viticulture. As the sun passes through the various signs of the zodiac adherents to biodynamic principles believe that it has a strong influence on plant growth and health. Water signs (Pisces, for instance) are favourable to vegetative growth, fire signs (Sagittarius, for instance) are favourable to growth of fruit, earth signs (e.g. Capricorn) favour root growth - obviously - and air signs (e.g. Gemini) favour flowers. Consequently the timing of routine vineyard and nursery practices such as planting out, pruning, weeding and so on are tailored to suit. The moon also has an influence on vineyard and cellar practices.

Working the vineyard ‘in harmony with nature’ is one thing. But some of Joly’s beliefs are a little too much for even the most ardent follower of biodynamic principles. He believes that the shape of the barrel is a strong influence on the developing wine - after all, it does strongly resemble the shape of an egg. Having said that Dominique Belluard in Savoie and Dominique Hauvette (it’s the Doms!) use ovoid betons to keep the wine in continual (fluid) contact with the lees so that batonnage is not necessary. Maybe he is simply being disingenuous and trying to rile the establishment. The egg shape is aesthetically pleasing; there is no law that fermentation or maturation vessels have to be barrel-shaped. His belief in the adverse effects of electromagnetic waves is another step too far for many. Again, one would reasonably ask whether any of would choose to live under an electricity pylon. Joly poses the question that we don’t really know where energy goes. Scientists who scoff at his ideas would do well to interrogate that element of doubt that prompts them.

Nevertheless, acknowledging these more unusual aspects of this belief system, it would seem that, whatever the mechanisms, biodynamics works. Most producers move over in steps, committing only a small vineyard plot initially. Impressed by the results - judged by the quality of the final wine from the converted plot - producers soon move over entirely, often within a few years. This is how other well known and long-term converts such as Zind-Humbrecht and Huet came to biodynamics, initial scepticism soon giving way to enthusiastic acceptance.

Zind-Humbrecht, Ostertag, Lafon, Joly, Durrbach – these are inquisitive, intelligent, thoughtful people. There are over 500 estates practising biodynamic viticulture in the world, including a roll call of the some of the most exceptional growers.

Is BD practical for larger companies?
Larger companies create monocultures. They can’t help it; it’s what they were created for. They would move out of this groove andinvent an entirely new business dynamic, so to speak. Vineyards would have to be broken up into smaller units, yields lowered, harvest would have to be manual, vintage would have to be respected. Biodynamics is the tears of the land in every sense; it is expensive and labour intensive. Would a large company use horses to plough the soil (it takes years to train a horse)? Would a large company be happy that their product would never be the same one year to the next? Would they accept that quality precedes quantity? The business model would have to be completely thrown out. Some larger companies will doubtless convert some of their vineyards and create a biodynamic label. Whilst this is not undesirable it is somewhat of a gimmick and a marketing ploy rather than an avowed damascene conversion to the true path of biodynamics!

What about BD in vineyards where the grower only owns a small section, such as the isolated blocks of vines owned by growers in the top vineyards of the Mosel?

Biodynamic farming is no picnic. Didier Barral’s vineyards are located in innumerable tiny clearings in the garrigue. A grower must know every vine personally. Such a relationship is ultimately very rewarding as the vineyard gives back in kind. Barral’s wines in the two totally opposite, but extremely difficult vintages of 2002 and 2003 were stunning.

Truly isolated blocks of vines provide an excellent opportunity to experiment with, and observe the effects of, biodynamic viticulture.

Do you see any value in trying to reconcile conventional viticulture with BD viticulture?
None whatsoever. There is a vast gulf between the two.

8. If a top Bordeaux property came to you and asked about implementing BD, where would you start them off?
I would start them off at the edge of a cliff and tell them to keep walking. My crocodile tears would then drown the roots of the vines.