This is biodynamic wine, not natural wine. Maybe you should read the article.
Hmmm…I thought that most adherents of “natural” wine grew Biodynamic?
Tom
Biodynamics is a system of agriculture, based on Steiner. While it is coincident with organic practices in the vineyard, it includes a lot of other practices that have nothing to do with that. As a matter of elevage, it allows use of oak and a whole lot of other practices that natural wine would not go near. It may be that a lot of winemakers who make natural wine also practice biodynamie (although I haven’t seen statistics), but, with reference to Jay’s post, not burying a goat horn with manure in it in the vineyard according to the phase of the moon would not disallow a wine from being natural. On the other hand, I understand that, for instance, certain Bordeaux winemakers have taken up biodynamie, but the wines are certainly not natural.
There are lots of biodynamic producers who are natural, but it’s still not a big proportion of the whole, since naturalistas are quite a small movement in comparison to biodynamy.
Also, many natural producers aren’t adherents of biodynamy, since making good natural wines requires more or less scientific attitude to the winemaking and hygiene - in order to do as little as possible, you really have to know what you are doing. I think that most of those natural producers who make cloudy, funky and skunky wines (the stuff most people only associate with the term “natural wine”) might be those who are most likely going to be biodynamic as well.
However, I’ve encountered many producers (both natural and conventional) who are certified organic and say that they farm according to the biodynamic principles but don’t have Demeter certification. When asked why, they tend to say something along the lines that they don’t stick to the voodoo mumbo jumbo part because they don’t believe any of it.