Biodynamic Agriculture: inquiry into food as spiritual medicine

iamthatis

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I have started reading and studying Rudolph Steiner's seminal work entitled 'The Agriculture Course'.

Since the corona-circus came to town, it seems to me that the world I know has changed in one positive way - people are beginning to turn to their lawns and yards with new eyes, eyes that see the potential for growing food. Sort of like a return the Victory Gardens in American's past.

Biodynamics could be a splendid avenue for being of service to others. Biodynamics, if it lives up to its reputation, may hold a key to producing the most healthy, nutritional food on the planet - food that is 'multidimensionally whole', that is to say, food that is grown in such a way as to allow it to absorb and radiate all the necessary cosmic influences that are most beneficial to human health. Medicinal food. This is far different from simple 'chemical agriculture' that is based on a purely materialistic view of ratios of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium.

I am new to the study of biodynamics, and know little of Steiner - from what I have read of his work, and from what I have heard of his methods of schooling, for instance, I have a good feeling about his work and his person. The purpose of this thread would be to study biodynamics, discuss its validity, discuss Steiner, and if anyone is willing, to engage in our own experiments in biodynamic preparations and share results with each other. It could be a place where the philosophy of biodynamics is discussed, as well, but with an eye to translating that philosophy into real life. And anyone who has already delved into this matter could share their knowledge, too.

The sense and significance of this thread (food as spiritual medicine) is perhaps best described in the introduction of the Agriculture Course:

"I was particularly anxious to get an answer to the question as to how one could build a bridge to active participation and the carrying out of spiritual intentions without being pulled off the right path by personal ambition, illusions and petty jealousies; for, these were the negative qualities Rudolf Steiner had named as the main inner hindrances. Then came the thought-provoking and surprising answer: This is a problem of nutrition. Nutrition as it is to-day does not supply the strength necessary for manifesting the spirit in physical life. A bridge can no longer be built from thinking to will and action. Food plants no longer contain the forces people need for this."
 

This is a short film that seeks to introduce the viewer to the regenerative agriculture movement. The story focuses on one particular family who claims to have undergone a process of personal transformation - by transforming their land practices. Without saying it, this demonstrates the 'as without, so within' principle.

As the C's might say, vicious cycles can transform into virtuous one with the correct application of knowledge.

According to the film, farmers are among the highest suicide rates by profession. Loans, working with known poisons like glyphosate, low sale prices, worry about crop loss and insurance company vultures, mining their soil into nothing, as well as the self-esteem of being 'the generation who lost the farm' all combine to a sort of crushing feedback loop of despair.

Regenerative farming practices can turn this around quickly - by building soil within the first year through diverse cover-cropping, eliminating glyphosate, and healing the micro-biome of the land. This is also not more expensive - it is less expensive than conventional agriculture, and apparently can yield immediate financial results. The film claims that consumers are driving this trend as the public gains more awareness of the dangers of glyphosate, and as we come to realize that our own health (as well as just about everything and everyone we love and cherish) depends on (1) a healthy, living layer of lithosphere and (2) the farmers who spend their lives growing our food. The feedback loop can be one of ecological healing - while meeting human needs.

There are few numbers crunched here, and little discussion of actual regenerative farming techniques. This film is more of an appetizer, or an emotional appeal. I enjoyed it nonetheless, as an inspiration to continue my research into biodynamics despite my quite busy schedule.
 
Q: (nicklebleu) Is the key to longterm survival and ability to feed ourselves in the current climate a return to non-mechanical farming and old concepts as grassfed livestock, organic home gardens, and regenerative farming techniques?

A: Yes

Q: (L) I think it also has to do with the raising of animals. If you have animals and they're eating some grass and producing stuff you can turn into fertilizer and then you can grow more stuff. The old ways are really good.

When I think ahead to possible scenarios and imagine the collapse of infrastructure, one of the main issues is no more irrigation water. It could be a disaster - or maybe not? I work as an organic farmer who happens to live in a semi-desert, so the question of water is one of the main concerns in an uncertain future.

That said, people all over the planet grew food for thousands of years without the help of electric pumps and kilometres of pipe. How did they do that?

I recently read this short pdf on Dry Farming from Oregon State University and thought to share it. It confirms that plants are pretty amazing little guys, and they are always exceeding our expectations. They can grow without any water other than rainfall. There is even a niche market developing for dry-farmed crops.


Key points:
• Plants are given adequate space with minimal competition from other plants for water stored in soil
• The soil going in to the growing season is fully saturated to a considerable depth.
• Weeds are meticulously managed and eliminated.
• The soil surface is cultivated or protected to prevent crusting and cracking, which can accelerate soil moisture loss.
• The site has deep soil with good waterholding characteristics.
• Soil quality is improved over time with cover cropping, adding organic matter, and minimizing soil disturbance.
• Drought-tolerant, early-maturing, or dryfarmed vegetable varieties are grown.

There is no precise recipe for how to dry farm organic vegetables on every site. This publication provides an overview of some of the key practices and considerations for your exploration of dry farming. There is always room for innovation. If you are new to dry farming, experiment! Start small, expand on your successes, and share what you learn with others.

However, there is a precise recipe for dry farming - in the American Southwest at least. A while ago I took a dive into Hopi culture, prophecy, and agriculture. Pretty fascinating stuff. One great resource that I found was the following report, The Pueblo Farming Project, which shares the agricultural techniques and also the pscyho-spiritual attitude of the Hopi, who have been growing corn and melons in the blazing desert for many generations.

I'll post the final chapter, which gives a good overview of this project. They are growing corn in what looks like pure sand!

Chapter 6 What we learned​

chapter_6_kiva.jpg

Paul Ermigiotti talking with Hopi elders in a replicated Basketmaker III pithouse

Through the Pueblo Farming Project, researchers, educators and volunteers have gained a deeper appreciation of traditional Pueblo Indian agricultural practices and the role of corn, or maize, in Pueblo society both past and present. The Pueblo farmers, especially our Hopi colleagues, shared their knowledge of corn farming with us, and they taught us how this plant—and the preservation their agricultural practices—are essential to their cultural continuity.

The Pueblo consultants on the Pueblo Farming Project agreed that the Hopi farmers should take the lead in the project, because they still practice direct-precipitation farming on the Hopi Mesas in northeastern Arizona. This type of farming relies strictly on direct precipitation and rainfall runoff. The length of the growing season is longer in the Hopi region, the soil makeup is different, and annual precipitation is less compared to the Mesa Verde region. Despite these differences, the Hopi consider the Mesa Verde region part of their ancestral homeland, and they wanted to know if their farming techniques would work in this area that was almost 200 miles distant.

section_2.1_origin.jpg

A Hopi tihu, or representational figurine, depicting Masau’u.

Archaeological remains show that maize spread into the greater American Southwest about 4,000 years ago. For archaeologists, the adoption of corn farming signals the beginning of Pueblo Indian culture. The Hopi also see their origins as tied to the adoption of maize. Hopi oral history tells how Masau’u, ancient caretaker of the earth, presented the Hopi with the gift of corn (qa’ö) upon their emergence from the underworld. The gift included a bag of seed, a planting stick, and a gourd filled with water. Farming corn became their identity, and this lifeway based on humility and perseverance in a harsh landscape, offered the Hopi a long and spiritually rich life.

gifts_of_life.jpg

A bag of seed, a digging stick, and a gourd of water—the gifts of life.

Scientific studies have determined that by 2,400 years ago the diets of the earliest farmers in the Four Corners area were heavily dependent on maize. It appears that by that time, maize made up about 70% of Pueblo people’s caloric intake.

section_2.3_header.jpg

The diversity of Hopi maize. DNA analyses were done on some of these varieties as part of the Pueblo Farming Project.

DNA testing of 12 named Hopi maize varieties, undertaken by the PFP, show that Hopi maize is genetically distinct, although it is closely related to other temperate maize from the US Southwest. The Hopi samples are closely associated with ancient corn samples that were tested in separate studies. The studies also show that the Hopi varieties have also undergone continued selection over the past 2,000 years.

chapter_6_mano.jpg

A mano and metate, used for grinding corn into meal.

Archaeological evidence of farming in the region includes items such as planting sticks, manos, metates, check dams, storage facilities, and abundant corn remains. These materials attest to the persistence of agricultural practices in the Southwest since maize was first introduced and reinforce the continuity of these traditional practices at Hopi.

In summarizing what we have learned about Pueblo farming in the Mesa Verde region, a good place to begin is with a discussion of how and why “Pueblo farming” is different from conventional “modern farming” practices. The Colorado Plateau poses many challenges to farming not present elsewhere. The elevation ranges from 4,500 to 13,000 feet above sea level, with the direct-precipitation farming belt extending from about 5,500 to 7,500 feet. Daily temperatures fluctuate widely here during the growing season with hot days and cool nights. Cold air drains and settles into lower elevations on the landscape, and Pueblo Farming Project temperature monitors have shown that in cold air drainages, the length of the frost-free growing season can often be well below the 120-day span typically thought necessary for corn production. For one of the Pueblo Farming Project gardens, Paul’s Old Garden, the frost-free growing season was just over 100 days on several occasions. Two gardens, Paul’s Old Garden and the Mike Coffey Garden, illustrate the differences in cold air drainage. The Mike Coffey Garden is located 30 miles north of the other gardens and is 1,100 ft. higher in elevation; however, because nearby canyons drain cold air away from the plot, the Mike Coffey Garden had a longer frost-free season. In contrast, the Paul’s Old Garden is located at a lower elevation and should be warmer, but it is situated at the bottom of a canyon that collects cold air from the adjacent higher ground, resulting in a shorter growing season.

Precipitation can vary greatly across the Southwest. This variation can be affected by elevation as well as annual jetstream patterns. Extended droughts are not uncommon. Annual precipitation ranges from 5 inches to 19.5 inches across of the Four Corners area. The annual precipitation for the PFP study area averaged 11.9 inches during the 10 years between 2008 and 2017, which is close to the long-term average for nearby Cortez, Colorado. The Mesa Verde region experiences a bimodal weather pattern that delivers the majority of its precipitation in the colder months of November through March, and during the summer monsoons which typically occur from July to September. Some of the hottest and driest weather occurs in May, June and early July.

chapter_6_mv_versus_hopi.jpg

The deep, sandy soils of the Hopi mesas, pictured here, contrast with the eolian or wind-blown soils of the Mesa Verde region.

Many favored agricultural locations are on reddish, deep, wind-blown soils. These soils, and good winter precipitation, are the key to successful farming without irrigation in the Mesa Verde region. These soils retain valuable subsurface moisture that carries seedlings and young plants through the driest part of the year without supplemental water. Caliche (a rock-hard layer of calcium carbonate) and mineral salts can build up in some soils, restricting root growth and affecting plant development.

Karen’s Upper Garden was placed on a ridge not far from ancestral Pueblo archaeological sites. This seemed like an ideal location—deep soil and a long frost-free growing season. Relatively poor yields from this garden, however, indicate a deficiency in some unseen factor that affects yields, and soil profiles taken in that area revealed significant caliche formation not far below the surface. With such variability in precipitation, soil, temperature and cold air drainage, the nature of direct-precipitation farming in the Mesa Verde region could be considered a “roll of the dice” in any given year. Pueblo subsistence farmers must have possessed a detailed understanding of the landscape and the conditions that can result in crop success or failure.

The first step in establishing Pueblo Farming Project plots was selecting the garden locations. Prime locations for gardening on Crow Canyon’s campus were somewhat limited because of Crow Canyon’s facilities, so the placement of our gardens was not ideal. In the areas available, the Pueblo farmers used the growth of specific native plants to guide their selection of optimal field locations. Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus), snakeweed (Guitierrezia sarothrae), and dense stands of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) grow in soils thought to be indicative of good areas for raising corn. Five gardens on the Crow Canyon campus and one garden located almost 40 miles northwest of campus in a prime direct-precipitation bean farming area presented a variety of conditions that allowed us to measure and compare different settings in terms of their agricultural potential.

Initially, several different varieties of Hopi maize were planted in the PFP gardens. Later, the selection was reduced to two varieties: white flour corn (qotsaqa’ö) and blue flour corn (sakwapqa”ö).

chapter_6_soya.jpg

Traditional Hopi maize planting uses a digging stick, or so’ya.

Most Americans are familiar with the modern practice of planting corn closely spaced in long rows. Many have heard the story of how American Indians taught Pilgrims to plant corn in hills with fish as a fertilizer. Traditional Hopi farming is quite distinct from either of these farming techniques. Planting technology is limited to a single tool: the planting stick or so’ya. Traditionally made of greasewood (Sarcobatus vermicalatus), today many planting sticks are made from a length of metal pipe with a narrow blade welded to one end.

Planting begins with the planter scraping the modern ground surface with a sideways motion of the foot to push aside the loose and dry upper dust layer. This exposes the top of the underlying hard-packed soil. About a square foot, or slightly larger, area is cleared. The planter gets down on one knee and grabs the planting stick with one hand low and the other hand higher up on the tool. Then, using a pulling motion, the planter digs a narrow hole to the desired depth. The hole is dug about 8 to 10 inches deep, or to the depth of good soil moisture. It is important that there is sufficient soil moisture where the seeds are deposited to ensure germination. The hole is dug deeper if the soil is drier and shallower if the soil is moist.

chapter_6_planting.jpg

Blue maize seed in a planting hole.

The base of the hole is enlarged and about 10–20 seeds are deposited into the hole. The excavated earth is put back gently into the hole in the order it was removed, with the moist soil covering the seeds on the bottom and the drier soil on top. Using loose top soil, a small well or basin is created above the planted seeds. This collects any precipitation that may fall and creates a mulch of dust that reduces evaporation.

The farmer then stands and paces off two or three steps to where the next clump of corn will be planted. Because the soils in the PFP gardens hold a bit more moisture than those soils near the Hopi mesas, the clumps are typically spaced about 1.5–1.75 meters apart rather than the 3-meter spacing typically used at Hopi. The wide spacing of the planted clumps reduces competition for valuable subsurface moisture. When the garden planting has been completed the farmers call out kwakwhay—thank you!

chapter_6_emergence.jpg

Maize seedlings emerge.

The seedlings emerge in about ten days after planting. The closely grouped seedlings in each clump provide some mutual protection from the sun and wind. By early July, when the plants are about 18 inches tall, the leaves begin to bend over as if to touch the ground. At this time the number of young corn plants is reduced to about six in each clump.

chapter_6_cutworms.jpg

A cutworm destroyed this young maize plant.

Weeding and monitoring for pests are ongoing tasks throughout the growing season. Newly emerged seedlings are vulnerable to cutworms that attack the stem just under the ground surface. Grasshoppers and ants can chew young plants to the ground. Rabbits destroyed whole PFP gardens during one dry summer. At Hopi today, and in our gardens, large cans with the tops removed are placed over the newly planted clumps to prevent cutworm damage, shade young plants, and protect plants from spring winds. The Hopi deter rodents by soaking dog dung in a bucket and then spraying plants with the resulting liquid by means of a rabbitbrush switch. Crows, ravens, and jays can pluck out young seedlings early in the season and, perhaps even more devastatingly, raid the garden at the end of a successful season. In unfenced fields such as those at Hopi, deer, elk and cattle are also known to destroy crops.

Weeding to reduce any competition from other plants is especially important in direct-precipitation farming. By far the most damaging invasive weed species in the PFP gardens is field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensus). This rapidly spreading plant is native to Europe and was not a problem for ancestral Pueblo farmers, and so far it does not seem to be very common in the Hopi area. This plant is hard to eradicate and certainly is the biggest competitor for moisture and nutrients in our gardens. Some wild or semi-cultivated plants are tolerated and allowed to remain in the PFP gardens. The young leaves of Rocky Mountain beeplant (Cleome serrulata), called tuma or wild spinach, are cooked and eaten by Hopi people. They also boil down beeplant leaves to make paint for pottery designs. Wild tobacco (Nicotonia attenuate) is widely used by Pueblo people for ceremonial purposes. These plants and a small patch of wild potato (Solanum jamesii) have at times been allowed to grow in some of the PFP gardens. Hopi farmers have indicated the allowing tobacco to grow to close to the corn will impart a bad taste to the corn.

The Hopi farmers have repeatedly stressed the importance of good thoughts and actions while tending to their fields. It is of utmost importance that the farmer’s heart be filled with good intention in the garden to ensure a bountiful harvest. When approaching a field, the farmer announces his arrival. Songs are composed and sung to the plants to provide encouragement for growth. Prayers for moisture are said while work in the field is carried out. The Hopi liken the development of their corn to the stages of a human life. The relationship of the farmer to the plant is analogous to that of a parent to a child. The corn goes through life much as a person does; as a child born, so too do the seedlings emerge from the earth. The plant sends out its first long leaves that bend over to touch the ground much as an infant learns to crawl. Like toddlers, plants then begin to stand upright and then grow tall. The plants reach sexual maturity as they tassel and silk. Finally they produce offspring of their own as fully mature ears of corn. A perfect ear of white corn, full to the tip with kernels, is called a “mother ear” (tsotsmingwa). Such ears are presented to a child at birth and later used at important stages in an individual’s life. When the ears are harvested the plants are pushed over to the ground so that they can rest—they have completed their lives.


chapter_6_yields.jpg

Yields from the Pueblo Farming Project gardens.

One of the research goals of the Pueblo Farming Project was to use the harvest yields from the gardens to evaluate the Village Ecodynamics Project (VEP) paleoproductivity model for ancestral Pueblo maize farming in the Mesa Verde region. The Village Ecodynamics Project modeled maize productivity estimates for all of the soil types in the region, including estimates for the locations of the Pueblo Farming Project gardens. The productivity estimates were created using soil type, a compilation of historical yields for those soils, reconstruction of annual precipitation based on tree rings, and calculations of the Palmer Drought Severity Index, which is a measure of stored soil moisture available for plant growth.

Over the history of the Pueblo Farming Project, the harvest yields have varied greatly between gardens and even between clumps within the same garden, due in part to many of the factors stated previously. There is a high degree of correlation between yields from the gardens and the Village Ecodynamics Project model estimates, but in some of the better years (greater precipitation) the Pueblo Farming Project gardens produced much more than the model estimated, and in bad years (less precipitation) the garden harvests were lower than the Village Ecodynamics Project estimates. As a result, there is far less variability in the Village Ecodynamics Project estimated yields than in the Pueblo Farming Project garden yields.

The small size of our experimental gardens may exaggerate some results. For example, in some years our harvest yields for some gardens were near zero. It is possible that a larger plot would have produced better yields.

The total precipitation and the timing of that precipitation seemed to be the greatest contributing factors in yields. Lower than average winter precipitation and a dry spring slows growth and causes plants to wilt early in the season. Heat stress brought on by delayed monsoon rains during the reproductive stages can also result in drastically lowered yields. In years when other vegetation suffered the effects of drought, PFP gardens increasingly became the target of grasshoppers and rabbits. These nuanced occurrences aren’t accounted for in the modelling programs, but they would have been noticed by ancestral Pueblo farmers.

The annual Pueblo Farming Project garden harvests were used to estimate maize yields as kilograms per hectare (10,000 m2, or 2.47 acres). These estimates can be translated into the number of people the yields from a specific garden could have fed in a given year. They can also be used to estimate the size of the area that needed to be cultivated to feed a family and grow a surplus for storage to buffer against years with poor yields. An average of 160 kilograms of corn per year per person has been estimated for a diet in which about 70% of calories come from corn. Our highest yields came from the MCG, which was planted with Hopi Blue maize in the year 2021. This garden produced an estimated 5,602 kilograms per hectare, a yield rate that could have fed 35 people had the field covered a full hectare. Among gardens on Crow Canyon’s campus, the CDG in 2017, planted with Hopi White maize, produced the greatest yields, with an estimated 1,461 kg/ha, enough for a one-hectare field to feed 9 people. The average yields of all PFP gardens over the years (442 kg/ha) would feed 2.8 persons per hectare. A family of six would need approximately 2.2 hectares of farmland for one year, and much more to create a several-year stockpile against future years of crop failure.

The low average yields from the combined Pueblo Farming Project gardens may be misleading. The gardens on the Crow Canyon Archaeological Center campus were not located in the prime agricultural lands available in the Mesa Verde region. Also, the amount of labor invested in weeding and pest control in the Pueblo Farming Project gardens was probably minimal compared to the effort expended by a subsistence farmer. Again, the small size of the garden plots may have played a role in reduced yields. Increased vulnerability of crops to damage by pests and edge effects (where the roots from vegetation surrounding the garden compete for valuable moisture) could impact yields of smaller fields more than those of larger fields. The time devoted to crops and the knowledge of the land gained from generations of farming is inestimable.

The Hopi farmers have shown us that their seed and farming practices do produce yields in their ancestral homeland. The Village Ecodynamics Project paleoproductivity modeling has provided a means to assess agricultural productivity in the Mesa Verde region in the past and possibly in the future. As we face the possibility of climate change and the challenge of feeding an ever-increasing population, the lessons learned from the success and failures of drought-prone farming in the American Southwest provide a unique opportunity to learn from and honor this traditional means of food production.

As our Hopi teachers have taught us, “keep a good heart, and pray for rain.”

chapter_6_end_2.jpg

Keep a good heart, and pray for rain.

And as an interesting side note on keeping a good heart & praying for rain - based on my research, I think we can say that the Hopi method of irrigation was also a matter of connecting with the ancestors in 5D via dancing! I wonder if this was some sort of specific dance passed down from Atlantean times? Another example of the human-cosmic connection? Superstition? From The Hopi Survival Kit by Thomas E. Mails, p. 47:

As a rule, the spirits of the Hopi dead return to the Underworld, the exception being that of Hopi leaders who have held important positions, and who have made significant contributions to their people. They go instead in their spirit form to the San Francisco Peaks, north of Flagstaff. At a sacred site there they join with other spirits who have preceded them. They then return each year to Hopi Land during the Kachina season as bearers of rain, riding inside fluffy white clouds. When dances are held, the performers and the spectators usually look up and see them drifting past in the cerulean sky. They come in response to the prayers and powers generated by the ceremonies. This rain the Kachinas bring is essential to the growth of Hopi crops in that it augments the only other water supply the Hopi have — ground water, itself a shrinking source today. Together, they make existence in Hopi Land possible. Without both sources of water the people suffer greatly. Having learned from personal experience that a drought can happen at any time, they remain acutely conscious of the fact that their conduct has a direct bearing on the amount of rain that comes. If the people behave badly, the Kachinas may be displeased and refuse to bring rain. In 1994, when the Progressives and on-the-fence villagers at Hotevilla turned against the Traditionalists and permitted the Tribal Council and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to begin the installation of sewer and water utilities, Dan predicted that this would happen, and it did. The Kachinas refused to come and there was no rain for the crops. The corn was planted, but it did not grow, and in the fall there was nothing to harvest.

So back on the practical plane, I thought this dry farming information is good food for thought, giving us more options for producing food as the 'big whatever' comes our way. Just because there is no modern irrigation doesn't mean that plants won't grow.
 
When I think ahead to possible scenarios and imagine the collapse of infrastructure, one of the main issues is no more irrigation water. It could be a disaster - or maybe not? I work as an organic farmer who happens to live in a semi-desert, so the question of water is one of the main concerns in an uncertain future.

That said, people all over the planet grew food for thousands of years without the help of electric pumps and kilometres of pipe. How did they do that?

I recently read this short pdf on Dry Farming from Oregon State University and thought to share it. It confirms that plants are pretty amazing little guys, and they are always exceeding our expectations. They can grow without any water other than rainfall. There is even a niche market developing for dry-farmed crops.


Key points:


However, there is a precise recipe for dry farming - in the American Southwest at least. A while ago I took a dive into Hopi culture, prophecy, and agriculture. Pretty fascinating stuff. One great resource that I found was the following report, The Pueblo Farming Project, which shares the agricultural techniques and also the pscyho-spiritual attitude of the Hopi, who have been growing corn and melons in the blazing desert for many generations.

I'll post the final chapter, which gives a good overview of this project. They are growing corn in what looks like pure sand!



And as an interesting side note on keeping a good heart & praying for rain - based on my research, I think we can say that the Hopi method of irrigation was also a matter of connecting with the ancestors in 5D via dancing! I wonder if this was some sort of specific dance passed down from Atlantean times? Another example of the human-cosmic connection? Superstition? From The Hopi Survival Kit by Thomas E. Mails, p. 47:



So back on the practical plane, I thought this dry farming information is good food for thought, giving us more options for producing food as the 'big whatever' comes our way. Just because there is no modern irrigation doesn't mean that plants won't grow.
There’s a book called Fertility Farming. It’s nuts and bolts stuff without the spiritual gloss, easy ways to farm without irrigation or read Call of the Reed Warbler about ranchers in Australia who are able to raise livestock on their farms by following regenerative practices. It’s all practical stuff without the spiritual gloss that guys like Steiner introduce.

Short answer is that organic matter is what stores water in the soil, so if you have soil that can absorb the rain because there’s organic matter in it, then that water can be used, otherwise it runs off causing lots of destruction.

After reading about the same subject for over a year, I’ve come to the conclusion that adding in some supposed element of “spirituality” to the whole thing just appeals to the oneness types and diverts from pragmatic applications. The Hopi worshipping corn is a bit nuts right? Especially when we know that consuming it for people is not the optimal diet. Maybe grow the corn for pigs/chickens ect…. But corn worship sure seems like an STS trap.

People were a lot smarter years ago too, fatten up pigs on the fruit/acorns that naturally come in the fall and use that meat all winter. Setting up a farm like that is pretty easy, though few people are doing it, plus that pragmatic thinking is going away. It’ll be the resourceful ones who survive and perhaps even thrive once things collapse.
 
There’s a book called Fertility Farming. It’s nuts and bolts stuff without the spiritual gloss, easy ways to farm without irrigation or read Call of the Reed Warbler about ranchers in Australia who are able to raise livestock on their farms by following regenerative practices. It’s all practical stuff without the spiritual gloss that guys like Steiner introduce.

Thanks for the references, it's always good to have more books on the list.

I'm curious - have you read Steiner's Agriculture Course? Or anything else by him? While he didn't have the whole banana, he looks to be quite the brilliant man to me.

For instance, here's what he said about vaccines way back in 1917. I mention this, because it applies not just to his prescience, but also to the left-brain materialist focus I'm picking up in your post:

I have told you that the spirits of darkness are going to inspire their human hosts, in whom they will be dwelling, to find a vaccine that will drive all inclination towards spirituality out of people’s souls when they are still very young, and this will happen in a roundabout way through the living body. Today, bodies are vaccinated against one thing and another; in future, children will be vaccinated with a substance which it will certainly be possible to produce, and this will make them immune, so that they do not develop foolish inclinations connected with spiritual life —‘foolish’ here, of course, in the eyes of materialists.”

“The whole trend goes in a direction where a way will finally be found to vaccinate bodies so that these bodies will not allow the inclination towards spiritual ideas to develop and all their lives people will believe only in the physical world they perceive with the senses.

The first step must be to throw people’s views into confusion, turning their concepts and ideas inside out. This is a serious thing and must be watched with care, for it is part of some highly important elements which will be the background to events now in preparation.”

“…It is pathological for people to even think in terms of spirit and soul. ‘Sound’ people will speak of nothing but the body. It will be considered a sign of illness for anyone to arrive at the idea of any such thing as a spirit or a soul. People who think like that will be considered to be sick and — you can be quite sure of it — a medicine will be found for this.”

Doesn't sound like spiritual gloss to me - more like a strong resonance with the knowledge gathered here on the forum. His term for his body of work is Spiritual Science, and he emphasizes that what he says throughout his Agriculture Course should be put to the test. There's Steiner's apparent advocacy of vegetarianism which is a red flag for sure, although elsewhere he speaks about the proper meat/plant ratio. But then there's also his Waldorf school, which is a damn sight better than modern education in my estimation. In short, I think he's a complex guy who gave the best offering he could during his day. I work as an organic farmer, and so I'm making use of all my years of weeding as I read his stuff.

After reading about the same subject for over a year, I’ve come to the conclusion that adding in some supposed element of “spirituality” to the whole thing just appeals to the oneness types and diverts from pragmatic applications.

Coming to conclusions - especially if you're new to a subject - can be bad for your health!

But I definitely agree that spiritual gloss can be bad news, especially when it goes into word salad territory. I'm not a big fan of salad in general, unless it's bacon salad.

But a point to consider is that there is also a spiritual reality interpenetrating in our world - a reality of which our own world is only a pale reflection. The crux is to discern which is gloss, and which is real. This is the central question that I've kept in mind as I read Steiner's work. Just to be clear, I intended this thread to be an inquiry into food as spiritual medicine with biodynamics as the starting point. I'm not interested in an ad campaign for Steiner, Steiner, ra-ra-ra.

I've recently finished reading his Agriculture Course and will be posting thoughts here from time to time. In particular, the way in which biodynamics considers matters of the spirit, and how that informs its pragmatic applications. I don't think that's as strict a dichotomy as you make it out to be.

The Hopi worshipping corn is a bit nuts right? Especially when we know that consuming it for people is not the optimal diet. Maybe grow the corn for pigs/chickens ect…. But corn worship sure seems like an STS trap.

I take a different approach. I've noticed that unfortunately, the C's concepts are oftentimes taken as an opportunity to stop thinking. They are deployed as conversation-stoppers. 'There is no time' is a classic in this case. An offhanded 'that's STS' is another.

In the case of the Hopi, or Steiner, I'm more interested in what they thought about what they were doing, and trying to understand their version of the human-cosmic connection, and see if there's anything to be learned there. This follows Collingwood's idea that in order to understand history, one must attempt to understand not just events or practices of a given time, but also the mindset of the people at that time - their view of reality which interpreted or produced those events or practices.

Yes, corn is not optimal food, agriculture is a psyop stretching back thousands of years, etc. But carnivore or keto fundamentalism can also cause a lot of damage.

My job currently is to grow organic produce for the local food bank - mostly root crops to fill people's bellies, onions, taters, squash, beets, & carrots. Peas and beans, too, and cabbages. In the future, food shortages will probably worsen - we've already seen the effects of that at work. It was the busiest Christmas ever. Meat may become scarce, too. So I'm operating on the principle that some food is better than no food.

I'm not sure if providing fresh vegetables to those in need is better than all the packaged crap available. My guess is that it is. People are asking for veggies, so I'm interested in providing the highest quality food that I can, including less technical methods that can work without modern infrastructure, tools, and machines, and techniques that can produce food in adverse conditions, the main two being colder temperatures and little moisture. Whether or not biodynamics lives up to all this - and to its own reputation - is what I'm trying to figure out.
 
Thanks for the references, it's always good to have more books on the list.

I'm curious - have you read Steiner's Agriculture Course? Or anything else by him? While he didn't have the whole banana, he looks to be quite the brilliant man to me.

For instance, here's what he said about vaccines way back in 1917. I mention this, because it applies not just to his prescience, but also to the left-brain materialist focus I'm picking up in your post:



Doesn't sound like spiritual gloss to me - more like a strong resonance with the knowledge gathered here on the forum. His term for his body of work is Spiritual Science, and he emphasizes that what he says throughout his Agriculture Course should be put to the test. There's Steiner's apparent advocacy of vegetarianism which is a red flag for sure, although elsewhere he speaks about the proper meat/plant ratio. But then there's also his Waldorf school, which is a damn sight better than modern education in my estimation. In short, I think he's a complex guy who gave the best offering he could during his day. I work as an organic farmer, and so I'm making use of all my years of weeding as I read his stuff.



Coming to conclusions - especially if you're new to a subject - can be bad for your health!

But I definitely agree that spiritual gloss can be bad news, especially when it goes into word salad territory. I'm not a big fan of salad in general, unless it's bacon salad.

But a point to consider is that there is also a spiritual reality interpenetrating in our world - a reality of which our own world is only a pale reflection. The crux is to discern which is gloss, and which is real. This is the central question that I've kept in mind as I read Steiner's work. Just to be clear, I intended this thread to be an inquiry into food as spiritual medicine with biodynamics as the starting point. I'm not interested in an ad campaign for Steiner, Steiner, ra-ra-ra.

I've recently finished reading his Agriculture Course and will be posting thoughts here from time to time. In particular, the way in which biodynamics considers matters of the spirit, and how that informs its pragmatic applications. I don't think that's as strict a dichotomy as you make it out to be.



I take a different approach. I've noticed that unfortunately, the C's concepts are oftentimes taken as an opportunity to stop thinking. They are deployed as conversation-stoppers. 'There is no time' is a classic in this case. An offhanded 'that's STS' is another.

In the case of the Hopi, or Steiner, I'm more interested in what they thought about what they were doing, and trying to understand their version of the human-cosmic connection, and see if there's anything to be learned there. This follows Collingwood's idea that in order to understand history, one must attempt to understand not just events or practices of a given time, but also the mindset of the people at that time - their view of reality which interpreted or produced those events or practices.

Yes, corn is not optimal food, agriculture is a psyop stretching back thousands of years, etc. But carnivore or keto fundamentalism can also cause a lot of damage.

My job currently is to grow organic produce for the local food bank - mostly root crops to fill people's bellies, onions, taters, squash, beets, & carrots. Peas and beans, too, and cabbages. In the future, food shortages will probably worsen - we've already seen the effects of that at work. It was the busiest Christmas ever. Meat may become scarce, too. So I'm operating on the principle that some food is better than no food.

I'm not sure if providing fresh vegetables to those in need is better than all the packaged crap available. My guess is that it is. People are asking for veggies, so I'm interested in providing the highest quality food that I can, including less technical methods that can work without modern infrastructure, tools, and machines, and techniques that can produce food in adverse conditions, the main two being colder temperatures and little moisture. Whether or not biodynamics lives up to all this - and to its own reputation - is what I'm trying to figure out.
Steiner is covered in The Call of the Reed Warbler, he does a good job of placing him in the historical context.

But carnivore or keto fundamentalism can also cause a lot of damage.

You’d have to cite specific examples for me here, ultimately I’ve seen significant improvements in people’s health from shifting toward this diet. Just yesterday I watched a video of a woman who lost 100 pounds in 9 months by changing to an all meat diet. Sure there’s nutcases who promote anything but by and large plants damage human health in many ways.

In the case of the Hopi, or Steiner, I'm more interested in what they thought about what they were doing, and trying to understand their version of the human-cosmic connection, and see if there's anything to be learned there.

The Hopi are rather explicit that they see their origins tied to the farming of maize, that’s their human-cosmic connection as I see it, which is unhealthy. Why it morphed into that is perhaps worth understanding I suppose so you could see the slow programming that STS guys use, however it’s certainly not a healthy connection for the long term viability of their people unless they’re looking to remain under the heel of cosmic forces that are deceiving them.

I honestly don’t know if the principal of some food is better than no food…. If you know that humans are designed to run on meats and animal fats, it makes sense to me to raise those and if you understand the principles of animal impact, things can scale rather quickly. In Australia they increased stocking density on land from 20,000 to 80,000 cows in less than 10 years. I can’t see that happening growing vegetables, especially if you consider the extra labor. There’s not much extra time involved moving livestock at scale. The butchering sure and with livestock there’s all kinds of nonlinear benefits that simply can’t be produced with vegetables.

Of course principals involved with growing crops can be used, a guy on Youtube called Bakers Green Acres raises pigs that way, plant the crops and let the pigs eat them, then lightly till the soil to incorporate manure and replant. The Regenerative ranchers are by far getting the most out of the land and are able to still produce food in adverse conditions.
 
FWIW, I throw in an article which provides some critique to Steiner's biodynamic farming.

CRITIQUE TO THE BIODYNAMIC AGRICULTURE OF RUDOLF STEINER

Personally I have no experience with this form of farming or gardening.

Once I stepped into a library exclusively filled to the rim with Steiner's work. I've been shocked by the sheer amount of written or transcibed material - it has been slightly overwhelming and I wondered how one single man could have produced so much material.
Scanning through some of the book there I found it very hard to deduce meaning. Back then I thought myself too stupid to grasp it, today I'd say there was a lot of word salad.

Another time I was able to observe keen followers of Steiner building a house.
Honestly I wouldn't want to build a house on the basic of Steiner's instructions- like the wood must be cut at a certain time and handled in a special way. You need to be rich and have longevity to build a house like this or so it seemed.

His beginnings with Blavatzky puts him into some shady light and his racial theories were quite embarrassing.

His biodynamic farming is not grounded in Steiner's personal experience. He wasn't a farmer, nor was he a gardener.
Anyway, all this does not mean that there isn't some good to be found in this form of farming.
 
His biodynamic farming is not grounded in Steiner's personal experience. He wasn't a farmer, nor was he a gardener.
That’s pretty much is why I can’t get into Steiner…. All the other people in Regenerative practices are speaking from personal experience….. and they have proven results that any pragmatic person can follow easily especially if things get difficult.
 
A few weeks ago I attended a two day seminar in New England US on regenerative agriculture. I bought a few books from the presenters while there: Nigel Palmer's The Regenerative Grower's Guide to Garden Amendments (making biologically diverse inoculants and mineral-rich amendments using leaf mold, weeds, eggshells, bones, etc.) and Bryan O'Hara's No-Till Intensive Vegetable Culture.. To be honest, I haven't read the books yet, although I am experimenting with Palmer's home-made soil tinctures and was about to look into Rudolph Steiner's techniques which O'Hara lauded as contributing significantly to the success of his ventures. All the speakers at the seminar emphasized "Listen to your plants......they will tell you what they need." At the end of O'Hara's presentation, he spoke of loving the land and the life you are nurturing; and being tuned to the spiritual processes of womb, birth, growth, maturity, fruition, and harvest.

Whenever I note that a kale seed (that is smaller than the proverbial mustard seed) can (a) (OMG) turn into a plant, and (b) provide kale salads all summer, I am in awe.

I am glad to be reminded to look more closely into Steiner's work, so I'll buy his agriculture book. Will it be the end-all for gardening? Doubtful. I haven't met the 'perfect somebody' as yet in my lifetime, but I have found much to be learned from a large number of 'imperfect' nobodies over time. Likewise, I've read some of Steiner and a bunch of his cohorts, and have been exposed to some interesting and unusual ideas; but I wouldn't join a cult and be their follower. If Steiner can offer ideas to enhance a spiritual union with the soil and plants and to "Listen and hear them speak" more astutely, that could enhance my garden, my dinners, and my life.

The Organic Grower website has an interview with O'Hara. A few excerpts are below.
[Bryan O'Hara] Book details biodynamic grower’s 30 years of no-till practices (Organic Grower)

"Since biodynamic growing techniques have been such a help at his own farm, O’Hara said it’s unfortunate that school of thought isn’t better understood. “Biodynamic is much more based on more spiritual concepts,” O’Hara said. “It really has a lot to do with working with nature as a living entity as God’s creation. It definitely is a more holistic view that incorporates the spiritual world into the work you’re doing on the farm.”

"While organic agriculture has respected the soil, he said, it’s been somewhat simplified through standardization.

"Biodynamics leader Rudolf Steiner’s ideas formed the basis for the biodynamic movement, but O’Hara notes that Steiner himself was quite flexible. “He talked tremendously about how what he was putting forth wasn’t dogmatic, and you need to continue to develop your ideas and how to work with natural systems in order to have effective agricultural systems,” O’Hara said. “Biodynamics is really strong on understanding how natural systems work, just how water works on the earth, or air, and how all the living systems on the earth work.”


I have to read the books soon, since spring is here, and will take some notes and copy and paste them here (e.g., some soil tincture recipes) maybe.
 
Steiner is covered in The Call of the Reed Warbler, he does a good job of placing him in the historical context.

So you read a book that mentions Steiner, but you haven't read any of his work, and then came to a conclusion about 'guys like Steiner'? And you don't see any issues with that?

In the intro to High Strangeness, Ark discusses two different approaches to matters that are hard to understand. He's talking about channeling, specifically the naysayers who reject channeling out of hand without doing much research. But I think his words can apply to what we're talking about here, because it has to do with closed-mindedness and opinion formation as truth:

This is the main difference between their approach and ours. While we are ready to question everything, and always look for new facts, other individuals declare “We know the Truth”. Here it is! And then we find one or another easily detectable nonsense statement that is claimed to be absolute, and this discredits everything else they say.

The Devil is always in the details.

Whenever someone claims: “All white is black” - I get suspicious. And I am turned off to everything else they say. Not because “white being black” is impossible, we know there are paradoxes, but because the person uses this three letter word: “all”.

As for parallel realities, yes, probably this is part of the clue. As for satellites trying, once in a while, their dirty tricks – yes, this is possible. And we are taking it into account. But always we are trying to apply our logical thinking, our “judgment”. But we know that this 3rd density reality check is never sufficient when dealing with possible hyperdimensional realities. But it is always necessary. Which means, in practical terms:

1) Always use it to the max.
2) Never think you can rely completely on it alone!

You've developed a habit recently of telling people to do more research. I actually appreciate it in a way, because we could all use the reminder. I'd be careful with that one, though, because sometimes we tend to make a habit of pointing out the flaws of others as a way of avoiding doing the Work on ourselves. In terms of this thread, you might do well to take your own advice, and do more research into biodynamics before coming to any more 'conclusions'.
You’d have to cite specific examples for me here, ultimately I’ve seen significant improvements in people’s health from shifting toward this diet. Just yesterday I watched a video of a woman who lost 100 pounds in 9 months by changing to an all meat diet. Sure there’s nutcases who promote anything but by and large plants damage human health in many ways.

I mentioned keto and carnivore fundamentalism, or the tendency to turn a certain diet into an ideology, adhering to it in a mechanical way without paying attention to the signals in our body. By and large I eat mostly protein and fat, and think it's great, but myself and a lot of people on the forum have noticed that these bodies of ours need a certain amount of carbs in order to function properly. I've found that it's good to keep in mind Ark's warning of the trap of black and white thinking. It's a real doozy, and so easy to fall into, especially when it comes to things we really care about, like our food.
 
Here's what looks like the most recently published overview of the academic literature on biodynamic farming:


Abstract: Research into biodynamic food and farming has a long history within the biodynamic movement. Whilst the basic aim of this research has always been to provide knowledge for furthering the development of this farming approach, recently interest has increased in sharing research activities and results with the global scientific community. After commencing with an introduction to biodynamic agriculture, this review gives an overview of peer-reviewed publications on issues in biodynamic food and farming that have been published between 2006 and 2017. The time before this period is covered by the reviews of Leiber et al. (2006) and Turinek et al. (2009).

Overall, 86 articles were included into this review. The most recognized topics were soil quality and soil health in biodynamic vs. conventional and organic farming, effects of biodynamic preparations, food quality, and viticulture. The studies provide substantial evidence for positive effects of biodynamic management on agroecosystems and food quality:

1) Biodynamic management creates system effects on soils, where compost application plays a crucial role.

2) Biodynamic preparations create effects on food chemical composition and food quality.

3) Biodynamic production can improve the value of food with regard to nutritive properties, taste and human health and well-being.

4) Biodynamic management improves grape quality and plant traits compared to non-biodynamic management.

Until now, the effects of biodynamic management have usually been studied with classical analytical methods in natural and life sciences through disciplinary and reductionist study designs. An application of study designs or specific methods that are conducive for a more holistic analysis are rarely implemented. Thus, we identify the development of appropriate methods and study designs for a holistic examination as a major challenge of future research in biodynamic food and farming.
6 Discussion

6.1 Development of scientific publication activity in biodynamic food and farming

Research activities in biodynamic food and farming have for a long time been prioritised within the biodynamic community, with the aim of directly supporting the development of the sector. Researchers preferably used sectoral scientific journals and other media that have been well-established within the biodynamic community. The online data base Biodynamic-Research.net comprises more than 600 publications from the period 1924 until 2009, but less than hundred out of these have been published in peer-re- viewed scientific journals.

The increasing number of articles in scientific journals indicates a growing interest of researchers in bio- dynamic food and farming to present their results to the scientific community.

To date, peer-reviewed publications on biodynamic food and farming cover the topics of soil management and soil health, effects of the biodynamic preparations, food quality, and oenology and viticulture. A small number of publications are also available on the topics of sustain- ability assessment and sectoral development. But until today, there is only one published study on the ‘farm organism’, even though this term is frequently used as an image to illustrate the interconnectedness of elements in a farm system even beyond biodynamic agriculture. In their study, Bloksma and Struik (2007) explore the applicability of the human as a role model for the design of farming systems on a theoretical basis. The authors try to apply the concept of human health and the diagnostic approach of physical/medical sciences in the assessment of farms, and conclude that the study of the farm organism must con- sider physical, socio-cultural and mental aspects.

And, even though animals are a key aspect of the bio- dynamic approach, no peer-reviewed articles from this research field appear in our review. In fact, there is a lot of research on animal-related aspects that is also of high interest with regard to biodynamic farming (e.g. Ebinghaus et al. 2017; Ivemeyer et al. 2011; Ivemeyer et al. 2014; Probst et al. 2012; Spengler Neff; Ivemeyer 2016). However, we found that these articles usually do not relate to biodynamic management as a factor in the experimental setup or study design, probably because biodynamic animal keeping has no unique management characteristics com- pared to crop production. Further, although more than 25 varieties of biodynamically bred cereal varieties are avail- able today (cf. Meischner and Geier 2013), as well as more than 100 varieties of vegetables (cf. Kultursaat 2018), no scientific articles have been published on biodynamic breeding and varieties to date.

6.2 Effects of biodynamic management

With regard to soil health, eight out of ten studies report a positive system effect of biodynamic management on soil organic matter levels and biological parameters. This effect is mainly driven by organic fertilization, and it could be argued that the effect on soil properties may therefore not be related to biodynamic farming, as it could also be achieved in non-biodynamic systems. Even though this is true in principle, the situation reflects actual farming practice, where biodynamic management by its characteristic elements leads to the effect described above, when related to typical non-biodynamic management of today.

However, studies from the Darmstadt long-term field experiment (Faust et al. 2017; Joergensen et al. 2009; Sradnick et al. 2018), as well as other studies that were published before the period of our review (e.g. Zaller and Koepke 2004) indicate that there may also be an impact of the biodynamic preparations on soil properties. Positive system effects of biodynamic management have also been observed in studies on sustainability issues.

Further, this paper describes 15 scientific studies directly focused on the effects of biodynamic preparations, from 2005 to 2017. In 13 of these studies, significant soil or plant reactions occurred with the application of biodynamic preparations. Only two studies found no significant soil or plant reaction. These results show that the biodynamic preparations have a significant effect. The conclusions of Chalker-Scott (2013) that no clear significant effects of the biodynamic preparations were deter- mined (the significant effects that occurred were interpreted as random) was not confirmed in this literature review.

From the beginning, biodynamic management has always aimed at a high food quality. In fact, significant positive effects of biodynamic management on food quality have been reported in 17 studies included in this review. Only 4 studies found no differences. The effects on food quality were not only system effects, but were induced by the application of the biodynamic preparations in several cases.

Viticulture and wine making have become an important subject in biodynamic research for the success of the biodynamic approach in this field. The positive impact of biodynamic management is largely acknowledged among wine makers. In fact, differences between biodynamic and non-biodynamic management on viticultural systems and grape quality have been reported in 13 out of the 17 studies under review.

6.3 Researching biodynamic food and farming

Studies included in this review usually apply classical analytical methods from natural and life sciences to analyze biodynamic food and farming. Further, they usually follow a disciplinary reductionist approach, where the effect of treatments on specific target variables is examined. Yet, biodynamic farming itself takes a holistic and trans-disciplinary perspective on effects on the whole organism, which may not be directly correlated to effects on single parameters.

Although different scientific investigation methods have been developed from the biodynamic movement (see section 3), they are only used to a limited extent in the scientific studies compiled here. In the sections on soil and on biodynamic preparations there is no study that includes holistic methods. In the section on food quality there are two studies (out of 21) that apply picture forming methods (Fritz et al. 2011; Kjellenberg and Gransted 2015). Among the studies on enology and viticulture there are 2 out of 19 studies using such methods, namely Kokornaczyk et al. (2014) with the droplet method and Fritz et al. (2017) with picture forming methods.

Another approach to a holistic assessment of effects in biodynamic food and farming could be taken by developing a conceptual framework that combines approved analytical methods in an appropriate trans-disciplinary study design. For example, the assessment of the impact of agricultural management on food quality would not be based only on the chemical composition of a food crop, but could include a survey of the full chain of effect from crop production to the impact on human health and well-being.
7 Conclusions

The number of peer-reviewed studies in biodynamic food and farming is gradually increasing. These studies provide substantial evidence for the effects of biodynamic management on agroecosystems and food quality: the effects on soils are usually system effects of biodynamic management, where compost application plays a crucial role. The biodynamic preparations create measurable effects on food chemical composition and food quality. Further, biodynamic management as a whole, and the application of biodynamic preparations in particular, causes a differentiation between biodynamic and non-biodynamic vine- yards.

To date, the effects of biodynamic management are usually studied with classical reductionist approaches in natural and life sciences using disciplinary and reductionist study designs. An application of study designs or specific methods for a more holistic analysis is rarely implemented. We identify the development of appropriate methods and study designs for a holistic examination as a major challenge of future research in biodynamic food and farming.
 
Hi everyone, here's what I can share on biodynamic agriculture/Steiner, I've read some of his most important books.

Theosophy: An Introduction to the Spiritual Processes in Human Life and in the Cosmos
The Education of the Child
An Outline of Esoteric Science
The Agriculture Course

He wasn't a farmer, nor was he a gardener.

True, the birth of the agricultural course begins with some farmers turning towards Steiner for practical means to overcome difficulties. It was the premises of the damages made to the soil/land by the use of mineral fertilizers and/or chemicals inbetween WWI and WWII in Germany.

Steiner's answer was a long lecture series (a weeklong gathering, one lecture a day), this he considered a summary of all his work regarding how "spirituality" brings life to existence. Finally leaving the farmers with very few practical practices to apply on their farms... Long story short, this impulsed some peoples to make experiments and research work, evantually giving birth to biodynamic agriculture.

Here's a machine translated bio as an example:

"Maria Thun (Marburg, April 24, 1922 - Biedenkopf, February 9, 2012) was a German biologist who pioneered biodynamic agriculture. Despite her training in nursing, she soon became interested in agriculture, a sector in which she already worked as a young woman.

Her practical knowledge in animal husbandry and horticulture and her interest in anthroposophy and the postulates of Rudolf Steiner marked her studies in biodynamic agriculture. For 50 years she studied the influence of the planets and constellations on the growth of plants. Her practical trials are reflected in his biodynamic calendars.
(These calendars alone would need an entire thread to be fully discused, questions welcomed...)


She also developed the test of preparations to increase soil fertility and remove impurities. Prepared by Maria Thun The Maria Thun preparation is a biodynamic compound developed by herself to increase the fertility of the soil and counteract the impurities that remain. It has a beneficial effect on the soil and the life it contains and helps to recover exhausted land. Biodynamic calendar The results of her trials and her observations to verify the effectiveness of the biodynamic method were made known and published and resulted in the Biodynamic Agriculture Calendar which is still published every year."


I experimented some practices in two situations :
-On horses' pastures and manure pile. (2 ha or 5 acres parcell) during 3 years.
-On my veggies/plants' garden.

The effects are great regarding organic matter decomposition and absorption by the soil.

The debate on effectivity/quantification is still running like we see here on the forum :-)
Hope we can bring it a little forward by this exchanges !
All questions welcomed.
Thanks for reading
 
Here is a more in-depth look at the results from the lit review I posted above. I was surprised to read about all this, 'cuz it indicates that biodynamics has a statistically significant advantage over organic agriculture on a couple of registers:

Soil organic matter (SOM) is recognized as a key factor of soil fertility, and of many soil functions (e.g. Fageria 2012). Higher SOM levels under biodynamic management compared to all non-biodynamic treatments have been reported from the DOC experiment (Fließbach et al. 2007). At Darmstadt, SOM levels under biodynamic man- agement were also higher than under non-biodynamic management according to Heitkamp et al. (2011), but the authors suspect that the difference from the non-biody- namic (organic) treatment that received the same amount of manure (without biodynamic preparations) is a result of the investigative procedure. No difference in SOM levels between biodynamic and non-biodynamic management was observed in the Frick experiment (Gadermaier et al. 2012), nor in the survey of pasture soils by Burkitt et al. (2007).

In the DOC experiment, biodynamic management, further, led to a higher proportion of more stable organic matter fractions (Birkhofer et al. 2007), higher biological activity (Birkhofer et al. 2007; Fließbach et al. 2007), a change in bacterial populations (Heger et al. 2012), and a better utilization of carbon by the microbial biomass (Fließbach et al. 2007) compared to the non-biodynamic treatments. Changes in bacterial populations (Faust et al. 2017; Joergensen et al. 2009) and a more efficient use of soil organic carbon by microbes (Sradnick et al. 2018) were also reported from the experiment at Darmstadt. At Frick, biodynamic management also had an impact on the soil microbial community (Gadermaier et al. 2012; Hart- mann et al. 2015). In their study in vineyard soils, Burns et al. (2016) found that microbial diversity and community structures were not affected by the management system per se (biodynamic vs. organic vs. conventional), but by specific management elements, and cover crops in particular.

Taking into account the effective difference between management systems compared in the different studies, the effect of biodynamic farming on soil properties must be considered first of all a complex system effect. The strongest effect on the system is caused by the application of animal manure, usually in the form of compost, irrespectively of the farming system.

Results from the Darmstadt and Frick long-term field experiments provide evidence for an effect of the biodynamic preparations on soil biological properties and processes, indicating the need for further investigation in this field. In the search for an explanation of the preparation effects, Giannattasio et al. (2013) supposed that the material and microbial properties of the horn manure preparation may impact on the regulatory effects of auxins on soil processes. Radha and Rao (2014) further assume that the bacterial and fungal populations in biodynamic preparations may increase the availability of phosphorus to plants.

The soil, and soil fertility in particular, has always received much attention in organic farming. As stated in the introduction, soil management in biodynamic farming aims at a healthy ‘soil organ’ in the farm organism. Until now, the majority of studies on management effects on agricultural soils - not only in biodynamic agriculture - focus on the impact on soil properties, but not on the performance of soil functions or ecological services.

5.3 Biodynamic preparations

The biodynamic preparations are an important element of the biodynamic approach and a key feature that differentiates the biodynamic from the organic approach. Sharma et al. (2012) found that the amount of cumin seeds (Cuminum cyminum) was significantly increased more than 30% by the application of horn manure and horn silica for two variations of fertilization. In a trial in Vietnam, the yield of two different varieties of soybean (Glycine max) increased 30% through the application of biodynamic preparations compared to the control without preparations (Tung and Ferandez 2007). Neither the control nor the treated variant was fertilized. Also the yield of two rice (Oryza sativa) varieties increased by 15% and 20% through the application of biodynamic preparations without fertilization (Valdez and Fernandez 2008). Valdez and Fernandez (2008) showed in the same study that the root length, root weight, sprouting weight as well as the available phosphorus increased (plus 20%) after harvest through the application of biodynamic preparations compared to untreated plants. The application of horn silica increased the yield of black gram (Vigna mungo) cultivated under organic conditions without fertilization by 27% compared to the treatment without horn silica (Trivedi et al. 2013). The net photosynthesis activity of all three pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) varieties and two out of three potato (Solanum tuberosum) varieties was significantly increased with horn manure and horn silica treatment (Juknevičienė 2015, Vaitkevičienė 2016). Seed quality of dwarf beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in germination tests was enhanced by treatments of the parent plants with horn silica applications (Fritz et al. 2005).


No significant differences in yield have been found for salad (Lactuca sativa) after the application of compost and spray preparations in three variations of fertilization (Bacchus 2010). Also Jayasree and George (2006) found no significant effect on the development of chilli plants (Capsicum annuum) through the application of biodynamic preparations.

The dehydrogenase activity in compost was significantly increased by the application of compost preparations (Reeve et al. 2010). The germination capacity of broad-leaved dock (Rumex obtusfolius) was with a germination capacity of 18% significantly lower in compost that had been treated with biodynamic preparations compared to the untreated compost where a germination capacity of 28% was detected (Zaller 2007). A high amount of bioactive substances and growth stimulating substances were detected in horn silica by Giannattasio et al. (2013) and Spaccini et al. (2012). Bacterial cultures that have been identified in horn silica were producers of auxin which had a significant growth-enhancing effect on corn (Zea mais) (Radha and Rao 2014). Jayachandran et al. (2016) analyzed the microbial load of the biodynamic preparation horn silica (501) and its activity against chosen rice (Oryza sativa) pathogens. Bacillus spp., Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and Bacillus toyonensis were identified as the main bacterial isolates. A strong antifungal effect was detected for Baccillus amyloliquefaciens against R. solani (Jayachandran et al. 2016). In the cultivation of pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) and potatoes (Solanum tuberosum), the nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus, urease and sucrose activity in the soil were significantly increased over three test years of using horn manure treatment (Juknevičienė 2015 in Juknevičienė et al. 2019; Vaitkevičienė 2016 in Vaitkevičienė et al. 2019). Further influence of the preparations concerning food quality are described in the next section.

5.4 Food quality

Heimler et al. (2011) compared different production systems (conventional, organic and biodynamic) and found out that the highest content of polyphenol was found in Batavia lettuce (Lactuca sativa var. capitata) grown under biodynamic conditions. Polyphenols are desired secondary compounds in food that add to the nutritional value of products. Biodynamic red beet (Beta vulgaris) also had the highest total phenolic content followed by red beets grown under organic conditions and the lowest amount was found for conventional red beets (Bavec et al. 2010). Conversely the highest total phenolic content was found in organic mangoes (Mangifera indica) and not in biodynamic or conventional mangoes (Maciel et al. 2011). The concentration of total phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity DPPH increased significantly in potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) of the cultivar Red Emmalie and Blue Congo after the application of the biodynamic preparation horn silica (Jarienė et al. 2017). The total content of total anthocyanins and total pheno- lic increased in coloured-flesh potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) through the combined application of the biodynamic preparations horn manure and horn silica (Jarienė et al. 2015). No differences in polyphenolic content from differ- ent production systems was found for chicory (Cichorium intybus) (Heimler et al. 2009). Differences in nutritional quality and phenolic acid contents in tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum) were rather caused by the year of production than from the farming system (conventional, organic and biodynamic) (D’Evoli et al. 2016). Masi et al. (2017) were able to differentiate the polyphenol content of bio- dynamic and conventional apples (Malus domestica var. Golden Delicious) but it was not possible to differentiate the samples regarding the volatile compounds. Three pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) varieties had significantly higher antioxidant contents of lycopene, lutein and zea- xanthin with horn manure and horn silica treatment over three years of experiments (Juknevičienė 2015).

Heimler et al. (2009, 2011) showed that biodynamic chicory (Cichorium intybus) and Batavia lettuce (Lactuca sativa var. capitata) have a higher antioxidant activity than the same varieties from conventional and organic farming systems. Biodynamic red beet (Beta vulgaris, Bavec et al. 2010), biodynamic strawberries (Fragaria spec., D’Evoli et al. 2010) as well as biodynamic mature green and ripe mangoes (Mangifera indica, Maciel et al. 2011) all had sig- nificant higher antioxidant activity than these products from conventional and organic farming systems.

Biodynamic cabbage (Brassica oleracea) contained more ascorbic acid than organic or conventional cabbage (Bavec et al. 2012). The same phenomenon was found for strawberries (Fragaria spec., D’Evoli et al. 2010). Red beet (Beta vulgaris) from biodynamic production system showed the highest sugar content compared to red beets from organic, integrated and conventional production system (Bavec et al. 2010). Furthermore, Vaitkevičienė et al. (2016) detected that the starch content of colour- ed-flesh potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) increased signifi- cantly through the combined application of horn manure and horn silica.

No differences related to the approach of production were found by Langenkämper et al. (2006) who analyzed the nutritional value of wheat (Triticum aestivum). Rangel et al. (2011) investigated in the nutritional composition of lime juice (Citrus latifolia) and also detected no differences related to the production system. Yet Lucarini et al. (2012) analyzed the nitrate content of organic and biodynamic lettuce (Lactuca sativa) and red radicchio (Cichorium intybus) and concluded that the biodynamic variant had the lowest nitrate level.

Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) from biodynamic cultivation in comparison to conventional cultivation were more positively related to traits such as quality indices, dry matter content, taste quality, relative proportion of pure protein and biocrystallization value (Kjellenberg and Granstedt 2015). Wheat (Triticum aestivum) from different fertilization systems of the DOC long-term field experiment were differentiated and classified with image forming methods. The indications of degeneration by aging in the image structures increased from biodynamic over organic to the conventional sample (Fritz et al. 2011).

In their comparison of milk from different management systems, Kusche et al. (2015) observed the highest share of nutritionally-valuable fatty acids in milk from bio- dynamic systems. Moreover it was proven in an encoded provocation test series that biodynamic raw milk has a better compatibility for children with food intolerances compared to pasteurized and homogenized milk from conventional production (Kusche 2015 in Abbring et al. 2019). The consumption of biodynamically manufactured dairy products lead to a higher fat quality of breast milk com- pared to the breast milk of women who consumed organic or conventional dairy products (Simões-Wüst et al. 2011). Newborn babies whose mothers mainly consumed biodynamically manufactured dairy products had a lower risk of contracting eczema (Thijs et al. 2011).

5.5 Enology and viticulture

The research area of biodynamic enology and viticul- ture has gained importance in recent years. A literature review by Castellini et al. (2017) outlines the biodynamic wine sector. It describes the definition and regulation of biodynamic wine production as well as the world wide biodynamic wine market. A long-term field experiment in Geisenheim, Germany, compares integrated, organic and biodynamic vineyard management and wine making. Biodynamic production resulted in lower yield, lower vigorous growth, lower pruning weight, lower grape cluster weight and less compact clusters and a lower presence of acetic acid compared to the integrated (Döring et al. 2015; Meissner 2015 in an article in Meissner et al. 2019). Organic management was between biodynmic and conventional for most parameters. Therefore, the three cultivation methods could be clearly differentiated in a main component analysis (Meissner et al. 2019). Biodynamic cultivation and organic cultivation differed only in the application of the preparations. Döring et al. (2015) also found less Botrytis in biodynamic production. No signif- icant differences in bacterial and fungal communities in the different plots of the long-term experiment were detected, except for a higher abundance of Pseudomonas spp. and Alternaria alternata in biodynamic grapes com- pared to conventional (Kecskeméti et al. 2016). Meissner (2015 in Meissner et al. 2019) detected more earthworms in plots that have been cultivated biodynamically compared to organic and conventionally cultivated plots.

The quality of grape juice and wine from the long- term trial in Geisenheim was examined with the picture forming methods. A differentiation between grape juice from the integrated, organic and biodynamic production systems was already visible in the first year after con- version (Fritz et al. 2017). The assignment of grape juice samples (2006-2010) with help of the image forming methods was significant for all years (Meissner 2015 in Fritz et al. 2019, 2017). Samples from the biodynamic treat- ment showed a better physiological condition than those from the organic treatment, as indicated by the ageing sequence. Samples from the integrated treatment showed the highest age and corresponding degeneration. Botelho et al. (2016) found no differences between organic and biodynamic management when looking at grape yield and disease indices, but the natural defense compounds of biodynamic grapes appeared to be stimulated. Guzzon et al. (2016) concludes that biodynamic production systems positively affected the development of microbiota in years with difficult climatic conditions compared to conven- tional production. The fungal patterns in the vineyard were significantly influenced by the production systems, namely conventional and biodynamic, in the vineyard. However, no differences were found in the fungal patterns in the harvested grapes (Morrison-Whittle et al. 2017). The yeast microbiota of organic and biodynamic Sangiovese red wine varied independently of the production system (Patrignani et al. 2016).

Kokornaczyk et al. (2014) were able to differentiate organic and biodynamic wine using the droplet evaporation method and considering shape descriptors. In this method, the structures of the dried drops of the plant substance are examined. Several studies focus on chemical substances in wine. Some found no differences in the chemical composition between organic and conventional wine (Tassoni et al. 2013; Plahuta and Raspor 2007) whereas others were able to differentiate wine from organic and conventional production systems (Yañez et al. 2012, Granato et al. 2015). Some investigations succeeded in distinguishing between organic and biodynamic wine with regard to their chemical substances (Parpinello et al. 2015; Laghi et al. 2014; Picone et al. 2016). The method of 1H NMR (a nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy) seems to be a successful method for the differentiation of wine from different production systems (Laghi et al. 2014; Picone et al. 2016).

Ross et al. (2009) were able to differentiate organic and biodynamic wines by measure of sensory evaluation. Meissner (2015) was partly able to differentiate on a sensorial level, while no sensory differences between organic and biodynamic wine were found by Parpinello et al. (2015).
 
As stated in the paper above, the main practical or technical difference between the biodynamic approach and the organic approach to farming is the use of the biodynamic preparations. Honestly, it sounds like Hogwarts style stuff, so that's part of why I was so intrigued by the results from the study above. I still have my own version of materialist normalcy bias!

Of course, the study result aren't conclusive, but I think they can reasonably be taken as an indication that a certain something is happening here.

The key thing to understand is that the biodynamic preparations are purportedly not designed to just effect a material change by material means, such as the addition of liquid manure to stimulate the growth of bacteria and fungi. They are designed to concentrate cosmic forces to cause material change.

In order to understand this, it's probably also necessary to understand what Steiner means by cosmic forces, in particular the difference between the etheric and the astral. He doesn't define them in the Agriculture Course. I think this is because everyone present was already familiar with his terminology. This made it confusing when I first read it, so Imma have to read up on what he meant then return to his text to think on it further. Are they different terms for the same thing? One only needs to search the C's session transcripts for the terms 'etheric' and 'astral' to get a sense that they have some substance to them. I'll have to do some digging to see what I come up with.

In the meantime, I'm going to post the instructions for the main two preparations here before investigating the 'weird-but-maybe-not-crazy' theory behind them. Once there are two examples to work with, it'll be easier for me to frame my considerations and my guesses as to why these strange potions appear to actually work, based on info from the C's and other forum research.

The write-up and photos are from the pdf found at Demeter Canada linked below. This booklet has info on nine of the preparations, but no information on the biodynamic natural insecticide tech, which actually caused me to LOL. I can post about that later, too:


Preparation 500 - Horn Manure
MATERIALS / PRODUCTION

For the production of horn manure, you need fresh and well-formed cow dung, without straw from lactating cows. In case you don‘t have enough dung from lactating cows you can also use dung from heifers. The best manure comes from cows grazing outdoors on pastures or from cows fed with a clover grass mixture supplemented with hay and straw. Runny cow dung should not be used. Straw or other plant parts must be removed from the cow dung.


THE COW HORN

Only undamaged and well-formed cow horns should be used. The horns should come from one’s own cows as far as possible. Cows should have calved at least once. The cow horn contains a bony core. To remove it, the horns can be placed in a safe spot in the sun or put in a compost heap for a short time. The horn will come off readily from the core after five to seven days. Horns of cows that have calved can be easily recognized by their calving rings. These rings are missing in horns from bulls.

TIME OF PRODUCTION

In the northern hemisphere, cow horns are filled with dung from the end of September to the end of October; in the southern hemisphere in March-April, sometimes in May.

FILLING THE HORNS

Manure is filled into the horns either by hand or with the help of a spoon or spatula. Care must be taken to ensure that the horns are filled right into the horn tip. To avoid cavities, the horns can be tapped with the tip of the horn on a solid surface or a stone. Horns that are either over filled or under filled will cause poor transformation of the manure. For larger amounts of horn manure, a sausage filler can be used. The dung in the cylinder is pressed into the cow horn.

1678569088990.png

PREPARING THE PIT

It is best to bury the horns in a prepared pit as soon as they are filled. It should be easy to find a suitable place in a field, meadow or vegetable garden. When choosing a place, make sure that the pit is not in the root area of trees or shrubs, as roots can grow right into the horns. Wetlands should also be avoided.

BURYING THE HORNS IN THE GROUND

The depth of the pit depends on the quality of the soil. If the soil is good and rich in humus, the pit should be between 50-60 cm deep. If the subsoil is too loamy, the pit can be filled up with a 20 cm layer of good topsoil. For moist and impermeable loamy soils and in areas with high rainfall it is advisable to drain the pit. In extremely heavy loamy or stony soils or in regions with high rain-fall the pit can also be made shallower. The horns should be placed two fingers apart, with the opening facing downwards, in order to prevent water from penetrating. Each horn should be surrounded by soil. If necessary, a second or third layer of horns can be made with soil added between the layers.

Then the pit is filled up with a soil layer of about 30-40 cm. There is no limit to the number of horns as long as all horns are surrounded by good soil. In hot countries it is recommended to cover the area with a layer of mulch. The soil should be kept moist. The pit should be clearly marked, preferably with four thick pegs or larger stones. In case these have been removed a map or photo can also be useful. The number of filled horns should be noted. The personal relationship between farmer and preps is improved if the farmer keeps an eye on the pits and visits these places now and again.

1678569112919.png


LIFTING THE HORNS

In the northern hemisphere the horns remain in the ground for six months until April. In the southern hemisphere the horns can often be lifted from the ground a er four months in August/September. Before all horns are lifted, the quality of some horns should be checked. The manure should be of dark brown, homogeneous consistency and have a pleasant smell of humus or forest soil.

If the material is still wet or green or smells of manure, the horns can remain in the soil for a bit longer. After lifting the horns, they are cleaned carefully. By gently tapping the horns on a stone the contents can usually be easily removed from the horns. It is easier to remove dry manure than wet manure. If necessary, a spoon, spatula or a piece of wire can also be helpful to get close to the tip of the horns. The horn manure is put into clean containers without any soil and crumbled gently.

Careful work is very important in this process. Earthworms can be removed. The number of horns dug up should correspond to the amount of buried horns. At the end of this work one should not forget to weigh the horn manure.

Depending on the size of the horns, an average of 60 – 150 g/horn of horn manure can be expected; from a single large horn: up to 300 grams.

After the manure has been removed, the cleaned horns can best be stored in the cowshed. In the northern hemisphere, the horns can be used three to five times for making horn manure. In hot and tropical countries, the horns fall apart more quickly and cannot be used that many times.

1678569425611.png



STORAGE

The biodynamic preparations are living substances and must therefore be stored and handled with appropriate care. Poor storage impairs quality. Carefully stored preparations can last for several years and will improve with age. Horn manure should be stored in a dark, cool place, filled in jars, glazed earthenware pots, ceramic vessels or glass containers. The vessels must not be airtight.

Horn manure should always be stored with constant humidity. Regular monitoring, especially in the first period of storage is therefore essential. Horn manure that is too dry can be moistened. If the manure is excessively moist, it can be removed from the container and dried for a short time however, it should not be placed in direct sunlight.



1678569444633.png

MATERIALS / PRODUCTION

500 P was developed by Alex Podolinsky in Australia and is particularly helpful if the compost preps together with the horn manure preparation are to be applied over large areas.

To produce 500 P the following ingredients are required: the horn manure prep matured for at least three months and the compost preparations.

Recipe: 60 kg horn manure, 7 sets (one set = 2 g) of each of the compost preparations 502 – 506 and 35 ml (7 x 5 ml) of the valerian prep.

First, 40 kg of horn manure are placed in a glazed clay or ceramic pot. Make five holes (appr. 5 cm deep) arranged in a circle with an additional hole in the middle. Fill each of these holes with one of the compost preparations 502 – 506 and pour part of stirred valerian prep into the middle one. The pot is then filled with another 20 kg of horn manure. Finally, the remaining valerian preparation is evenly distributed over the surface of the horn manure.


Horn manure prepared in this way must be left to mature for at least another three months before being used. During storage the container should be kept in a wooden box in a cool, dry, shady spot. The box should be lined with peat or coco fibre. Further information: see “Storage of preparations”.

Like the horn manure prep, the 500 P needs to be stirred for one hour before application. The 500 P prep should be applied either before sowing or directly after the end of the harvesting season. The soil should be moist.


1678569461785.png

Preparation 501 - Horn Silica

MATERIALS / PRODUCTION

Very finely ground crystalline quartz (SiO2) is required for the production of the horn silica preparation. For this purpose, rock crystal or pure quartz rocks can be used. The crystals should not contain other minerals.

For the production of the horn silica preparation un-damaged and well-formed cow horns are also required. Horns used for the silica preparation should either be new or be used for this purpose only.

To obtain of very finely ground quartz powder several steps are necessary. Large pieces of quartz must be crushed with a heavy hammer until they are small enough to be be crushed in a solid iron mortar; some use a sawn-off gas cylinder.

Fragments of quartz can be extremely sharp: wear protective goggles. Because of the fine dust produced during grinding, it is recommended to wear a protective mask. The mortar can be covered with a piece of cotton cloth. When crushing in an iron mortar, fine metal abrasion can occur. To obtain a pure product, iron particles can be removed with a strong magnet.

After grinding, the crushed quartz pieces are sieved. The coarse material is further crushed, and the finer material is crushed into a flour-like consistency. Traditional mill- stones, granite slabs or glass plates (8 mm or more) can be used for this process. Be aware that the grinding on the glass plates can contaminate the quartz, so granite slabs are much better for this purpose. The quartz must be ground into a flour so fine that it can be sifted through a tightly woven cotton cloth. To check the degree of fineness, the powder can be tested between the teeth; if it crunches, it is not yet fine enough.



1678570198967.png
FILLING THE HORNS

The quartz flour is mixed with clean water to form a thick paste and filled into the cow horns. The horns should be placed vertically. Cavities should be avoided. Some farmers pour a rather runny silica into the horns, while others prefer to fill a solid paste with the help of spoons into the horns. After filling, any excess water will rise to the top. Depending on the consistency of the paste, this can take a few hours or one or two days. Excess water must be poured off and the horns topped up with quartz paste. Before burying, the paste should be of a solid consistency.

BURYING THE HORNS

In the northern hemisphere, the horn silica preparation is filled into the horns from March-April. These remain in the earth for six months until September-October; in the southern hemisphere, the horns remain in the soil from September-October to March-April.

The freshly filled horns are placed in the pit with the opening facing down. Some farmers seal the horns with clay. Each horn must be surrounded by soil. The pit should be kept free of vegetation.


1678570236603.png


EXCAVATING THE HORNS

After about six months the horns can be dug out. The horns need to be cleaned from the outside. Any fungi or soil should be scraped away from the mouth of the horn to avoid contaminating the prep when the horns are emptied. By gently tapping the horns on a stone the contents can usually be easily removed from the horns.

Depending on the size of the horns, an average of 150 – 250 g of horn silica can be expected; from a single large horn even up to 600 – 700 grams.

STORAGE

The silica preparation can be filled into a clean, trans-parent glass jar and stored in a bright place that catches the morning sun. Alternatively, it is possible to leave the preparation in the horns until the silica preparation is used. The horns should be placed in a light and sunny position. The silica preparation should never be stored in the dark.

As long as the preparation remains dry it can be used for many years.


1678570280983.png

Application of Field Preparations 500 & 501


STIRRING AND SPRAYING THE HORN MANURE AND HORN SILICA PREPARATIONS

The two field spray preparations, horn manure and horn silica, must be diluted in water and stirred rhythmically for exactly one hour before application. They are stirred at different times and applied with different methods. Their effects complement and intensify each other. They must be understood as a unity. Both preparations are the cornerstones of biodynamic work.

There are diverse methods for stirring and application. The appropriate method depends on the size of the area, weather conditions, time required, number of workers involved, etc. Ideally, stirring vessels and sprayers should only be used for (biodynamic) preparation work.

STIRRING PLACE

Recommendation: Set up a permanent stirring place in the open air. Several criteria are to be considered: The location should be central but quiet and protected. Direct access to water is essential. It is helpful if the place can easily be accessed by tractors and is roomy enough to fill large barrels.

A beautifully designed area with trees, shrubs and flowers may add a nice touch.

WATER QUALITY

Only clean water is used for stirring. Rainwater or spring water is suitable, drinking water or clean well water can also be used. The water should be lukewarm before stirring. If necessary, the water must be heated to approx. 37°C.

[my note - it looks like this means using non-chlorinated water ]

STIRRING CONTAINERS FOR MANUAL STIRRING

Containers must be clean, uncontaminated and should preferably be used for stirring purposes only. Ideally they should be made of wood, stainless steel, earthenware/ ceramics or copper. If such containers are not available, a plastic container will suffice. Please note: Sooner or later plastic particles rubbed off by the stirring will find their way into the water, however, it is better to use a plastic drum than not to stir at all. In the long run, aim to replace plastic containers with more appropriate ones.

Each container must be greater in height than in diameter. The shape of the drum should be cylindrical or slightly conical. For vigorous stirring a larger vessel is necessary. To create a well-formed vortex, the volume of the container should be about twice the volume of water.

STIRRING METHODS

The two field spray preparations can be stirred using different methods. For small quantities, stirring by hand is possible. Some farmers use tools such as whisks or stirring rods. If a tool is suspended, it should be movable. A wooden hand-stirrer should fit comfortably in your hand. A piece of wood or brushwood can be used as broom. Make sure that the broom is easily removable, so cleaning is simplified. For smaller quantities (up to 50 litres) a simple stick or small broom is sufficient. For mechanical stirring, specially designed machines and drums have been developed.

1678570730813.png

STIRRING / DYNAMISATION

Stirring starts with slow but vigorous movements at the periphery of the barrel until with increasing stirring speed a vortex forms. The vortex should go right to the bottom of the barrel. Then the stirring process is stopped abruptly resulting in chaos in the water; without interruption a new vortex form develops running in the opposite direction. The formation of the vortex must be robust so that an intensive mixing and aeration of both water and preparation can take place.

This all depends on bringing about a thoroughly intimate connection between the stirrer and the process of stirring. Creating and breaking the vortex at regular intervals is continued clockwise and anti-clockwise for exactly one hour. This stirring method can be done in small buckets as well as in large barrels. With a good stirring device, even large quantities, i.e. 150-180 litres, can be stirred by one person for one hour without difficulty. Immediately after stirring, the preparation should be applied.

When it comes to the preparations, working together is part of the biodynamic commitment. So stirring the preparations horn manure and horn silica with a group of people, each person with a bucket, is a great experience.

STIRRING AND SPRAYING HORN MANURE (500)

Quantity: 100 g in 25 to 50 l water / ha

The horn manure preparation acts on soil and root growth, promotes microbial life and the formation of humus. As soil structure is improved, the soil can absorb and retain water and nutrients more easily.

Horn manure should be sprayed at least twice a year, at the beginning and the end of the growing season. It is best spread on moist soil, or directly before rain. Horn manure can also be sprayed during or a er rain. Please note: Sufficient soil moisture is very important.

The preparation should be applied onto bare soil directly a er stirring. It should be sprayed on meadows or pastures before the beginning of plant growth and after the first grassland mowing. If the soil is to be mulched, spraying must be carried out before mulching.

Before stirring, the preparation must be dissolved in water and then stirred vigorously for one hour without interruption. Ideally, stirring and spreading should be carried out in the late afternoon or early evening with a slightly overcast sky.

Horn manure should be sprayed as evenly as possible in droplets over a wide area onto the moist ground. Methods of application vary. For small areas horn manure is sprayed with buckets and hand brushes. Branches of shrubs or trees can be cut to size. Knapsack sprayers driven by hand or motor may be employed at low pressure (max. 0.5 – 1 bar). For large areas tractors or other machines with appropriate attachments are used. Avoid clogging the nozzles by carefully filtering the liquid beforehand.


1678570754330.png


STIRRING AND SPRAYING HORN SILICA (501)

Quantity: 4 g in 25 to 50 l water / ha

Horn silica, the polarity to horn manure, compliments its effects. The preparation is used several times a year during the growth period of plants. It promotes the metabolism and assimilation of plants and enhances plant health by increasing their resilience.

It is relatively easy to describe the potential applications of horn manure. As to horn silica, this proves to be more difficult. Depending on the time of application, horn silica stimulates the growth of plants and promotes their maturation. Effects are optimal if plants are sprayed during their most intensive growth stage.

Cereals can be sprayed after tillering, during stem extension and heading. Fruit trees are best treated when their leaves are fully developed, again at fruit formation and during maturation. In general, horn silica increases the storage capacity of grains, pulses, fruits and it improves flavour.

Do not spray seedlings or transplants that are taking root. Avoid spraying during drought.

The stirring of horn silica is carried out directly or soon after sunrise on dry and sunny days. Plants must not be wet or bedewed. Horn silica should never be applied directly before or after rain. Like horn manure, horn silica is stirred for exactly one hour. The vortex formation is of great importance for the blending and dynamisation of water and horn silica. Preparation 501 is carefully filtered and sprayed onto the plants immediately after stirring. During application, care should be taken to ensure that the liquid is sprayed in as fine a mist as possible.

On small areas the horn silica preparation can be applied with knapsack sprayers. Application must be carried out with high pressure of at least 2-3 bar (and more). Spray- ing horn silica with brooms or brushwood is inappropriate. When knapsack sprayers are used, the spray lance is swung back and forth in a high semi-arch so that the horn silica preparation is distributed evenly on the plants in a finely sprayed mist.

In order to achieve a greater range, extensions can be attached to the spray lance. In orchards motor-driven knapsack sprayers are useful. For larger areas, machines with special attachments are used which can cover 10 m and more. Today, impassable terrain can be sprayed with the help of drones.



1678570769142.png
 
Thanks for the video. I'm going to check out those books as well.

I can't comment as I have not read those but if I ever get the chance I'll try out a few things in the ole backyard. Perhaps a time lapse comparison of some BRIX measurements.

If your time permits I'm very interested to know how it works out for you.

Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom