In the "sustainable" thread, I was asked:

> I would like to learn more about... biodynamic practice.

It will be a longish process to learn, so a longish explanation is needed.

Start by reading Rudolf Steiner's "Lectures On Bees", online here, or in
paperback from a used book store.
http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA351/English/SGP1975/NinBee_index.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/o7wwxl4

Don't pay money for a class, don't read a re-hashing of Steiner written by
someone who never met him, read the original!
Steiner wrote a massive body of work about a wide range of subjects, and you
can read it all for free, and decide for yourself about his views:
http://www.rsarchive.org

But a rationalist is not going to have an easy time with any of it.
Biodynamics is an application of "Anthroposophy" to agriculture.
"Anthroposophy" is a religion/cult/philosophy created by Steiner, who had
objections to "Theosophy", another religion/cult/philosophy.  The astute
reader will quickly see that Steiner cribbed a lot from Goethe.  (Those
burdened with a classical education will recall that Goethe wrote fiction -
novels.)

I should stress that Biodynamics is at least not "lassie faire beekeeping"
or "treatment free beekeeping" at all - it allows one to take pragmatic
veterinary steps with the bees.  For example, one is permitted to both feed
and treat for varroa.  But in doing so, one must follow mystical practices
of no apparent value to the bees, some with no tangible effect in the
context of measurable results, and some with potential for harmful results.

While Biodynamics has resulted in some very good wines, it is only because
the "practices" forced the growers to pay more attention to the plants and
the soil, which is never a bad thing.  I've yet to see it translated into
consistent success in any other segments of agriculture, including
beekeeping.  

Be warned that Rudolf Steiner never kept bees himself.  His "Lectures on
Bees" are clearly the work of someone who has never seen a comb, a hive, or
a queen. He was a self-proclaimed clairvoyant, who endlessly "lectured" on
"spiritual science" to anyone who would listen.  After a long series of
failures to attract a following (or even much of an audience) in subjects
from physics to education, he hit upon the idea of traveling around the
rural areas giving lectures to farmers, who had few other entertainment
options.  This was the key to the spread of Steinerism and Biodynamics, and
the only reason Waldorf Schools and Biodynamic wines exist today.   

If, like most people, you've never heard of Steiner, note that those of us
of German heritage are deeply ashamed of four things:  Wilhelm II, Hitler,
Steiner, and how that annoying Ring ends up right back where it started (at
the bottom of the Rhine) after you sit through the entire saga of Wagner's
Ring cycle from Das Rheingold to Gotterdammerung.  

The Biodynamics practitioners and salesmen of today try as hard as possible
to distance themselves from their founder's more wacky ideas, his racism,
and his flat statements contrary to basic known facts, such as the fact of
gravity, the fact that neither islands nor continents float on water, and
the fact that the planets orbit the sun.  You can read about all this any
number of places where Steiner is debunked, here's one:
http://sites.google.com/site/waldorfwatch/steiners-blunders
or
http://tinyurl.com/nqyjjp7

To see how current practitioners talk about their Biodynamic practices, you
can read this explanation from one of the first vineyards to take up
Biodynamics, and decide for yourself what they are saying:
http://coulee-de-serrant.com/en/art.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/p9xt9sk

Now that you have some context, the actual things one does in "biodynamic
beekeeping" changes radically from time to time.  Current practitioners of
Biodynamics feel free to interpret and re-interpret Steiner's "teachings" to
suit their own current needs.  The first Biodynamic standards for Biodynamic
anything were created in 1992, and are under steady revision.   

While this exposes the cynicism behind the money machine that is the
Demeter-International e.V. , the Biodynamics marketplace, and the registered
Trademarks for "Biodynamic®" and the Demeter logos, it at least keeps the
practices in line with a reasonable chance of being able to keep up with all
the invasive species of pests, parasites, pathogens, and plagues that come
to our shores from the far reaches of the planet with all the World Trade
everyone thought was such a great idea at the time.

So, there are the current standards:
http://www.biodynamic.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/Demeter_Standar
ds/Demeter_International_Bee_Standards.pdf
or
http://tinyurl.com/ptb8r7d

An FAQ:
http://www.biodynamic.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/Bees/bee_FAQ_fi
nal.doc
or
http://tinyurl.com/q9uz57p

And there are even consultants you can hire:
http://apiculturebiodynamique.com/biodynamie/Michael_Weiler_Biodynamic-Beeke
eping_Consultant.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/ppt6rog

Once one gets away from pay-as-you-go Corporate Steinerism, one finds many
sincere people for whom the specific beliefs and practices of Biodynamics
have struck a chord.  It is unknown if they have done their homework on
Anthroposophy or Steiner, or if they are aware of the mystical basis of all
of this, aside from the obvious extensive use of astrological charts to
schedule specific tasks.  I've asked several if there was a "Catholic",
"Lutheran", or "Muslim" way to keep bees, and the blank stares revealed just
how successfully the Biodynamics PR machine has built a firewall between the
religious cult and the "agricultural teachings" of that cult.  Many people
have no idea that there ever was a cult, nor have they heard the word
"Anthroposophy".

When one starts with a transcript of a talk by a self-described clairvoyant,
and takes those words as ideas that are inherently "good for the bees", or
"more natural", one runs up hard against cases where the clairvoyance
attempts to contradict hard-won objective reality, such as the bit about the
planets revolving around the sun.  So, quoting from Steiner's 2nd lecture,
one finds that Steiner had a positive view of "modern beekeeping" circa
1923:

"Speaking generally today, one cannot but praise modern bee-keeping; so long
as we see all such precautions observed of which Herr Müller has told us, we
must admire them in a certain sense. But we must wait and see how things
will be in fifty to eighty years time, for by then certain forces which have
hitherto been organic in the hive will be mechanised, will become
mechanical. It is not possible to bring about that intimate relationship
between the colony and a Queen that has been bought, which results naturally
when a Queen comes into being in the natural way. Only, at first these
things are not observed. Of course, I by no means wish that a fanatical
campaign in opposition to modern bee-keeping should be started, for one
cannot do such things in practical life."

Sadly, the "fanatical campaign in opposition to modern bee-keeping" is
exactly what has resulted.

But few biodynamic practitioners are hardcore fanatics.  I have had several
conversations with David Heaf of the UK, who started keeping bees in 2003,
follows biodynamic rules, and goes further to advocate the Warre hive
(standard Langstroth-style hives, but with top bars rather than full frames
and foundation).  Despite having only about a decade of experience with
bees, he has written several books about Warre hives and "natural"
beekeeping.  He has worked hard at explaining to me the value of
"Nestduftwarmebindung", the claimed benefit of having a tightly sealed
top-of-hive to keep in warmth and the pheromones/scent of the hive, as
opposed to the conventional view for an East-Coast USA beekeeper, which
would ventilate the top of the hive, at least in winter.  I think focusing
on a single small issue like this is a good way to contrast a practice based
upon mysticism and belief with one based upon evidence and controlled
studies.

One is left with the same old conclusion - that bees are amazingly tolerant
of a wide range of conditions, and can not only survive, but thrive under
conditions bordering on outright abuse.  It is no wonder than one man's
"successful practice" can be another man's "fatal error", as both are likely
fooling themselves about the impact of their efforts in the larger context
of larger forces like weather and varroa infestations.  Unless, of course,
one of them has a pile of data and a statistics package with which to sift
through the data and thus find objective reality.

In regard to all the various "alternative approaches" to keeping bees, I
always ask two questions:

1)  What do you call an alternative beekeeping practice that works?  Part of
conventional beekeeping!  Stuff that actually works is very quickly adopted
by both hobbyist and commercial beekeepers.  The last good example I can
think of was the Crisco patties (with nothing added except sugar) for the
treatment of tracheal mites in the years before tracheal mite resistance
became a basic requirement among queen producers.  

2)  Would one care for one's horses in this way?  One's barn cats? One's
kids? If the answer is "no", reconsider, as creatures in your care are owed
the best stewardship you can offer.  


             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html