Earlier this week, we invited a group of national, regional and local food writers to join us at our client Montinore Estate in Forest Grove, Oregon, to learn about the biodynamic agricultural methods that Montinore uses in the vineyards and the winery.

We spent six hours in education mode — touring the grounds, examining the vines, and yes, holding cow horns, with owner Rudy Marchesi and biodynamic soil consultant Philippe Armenier.  Armenier is the former owner of a winery in Chateauneuf du Pape and now works with wineries in Washington, Oregon and California.

We ate delicious food prepared by Kristin Marchesi of Montinore – drank wine, of course, including several from Montinore as well as biodynamic wines from some Old World wineries, in France, Italy, Germany and Austria.

The discussion bounced between Armenier’s deep-rooted philosophical beliefs in the biodynamic principles outlined decades ago by Rudolph Steiner and Marchesi’s practical “hey, I’m doing it and it works” explanations of the biodynamic methods used at the estate.

The day invited interest, curiosity, skepticism, wonder — and hopefully more interest in biodynamics as a whole.  At Watershed, we’re certainly intrigued and will be digging deeper into the subject.

Check back soon for more photos and a short primer on the basics of biodynamics.

Next Monday, Watershed will help bring together national and international experts and writers to demystify the often controversial and misunderstood methods of biodynamic agriculture.  Hosted by Montinore Estate, this event will include experts such as Philippe Armenier, a leading biodynamic agriculture consultant to more than 30 wineries in California, Oregon and Washington.

Interest in biodynamic methods is increasing in the media and positive articles like the recent Wall Street Journal story “Discovering Biodynamic Winemaking” definitely help the BD cause.  But rarely is the word “biodynamic” mentioned without controversy lingering around the edges. Take this reader response from the article’s comment section:

“It continues to baffle me how otherwise intelligent, thoughtful winemakers can subscribe to such bizarre and indefensible practices.”

At the boot camp, we’ll be thrust feet first into the controversial world of biodynamic methods and we hope to answer some questions, like:

1.  Are biodynamic methods appropriate for all forms of agriculture?

2.  What are the additional investments (time and financial) of practicing biodynamic farming over conventional farming?

3.  What’s with the sheep horns and chamomile sausage?

4.  Can we taste the difference?

Surely, there is much more to discover, and we intend to share that with you in a follow up post. But for now, we’d like to hear what questions you’d have. What have you always wanted to know about biodynamics, but didn’t have the expert-on-hand to ask?

That’s a question that we don’t necessarily hear directly from restaurant clients, but we know it’s something that many restaurant owners ask themselves. In a recent New York Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/30/dining/30comp.html that addressed the issue, chefs are squawking a bit:

“No one can afford to give food away in this economy,” said Scott Conant, the chef and an owner of the Scarpetta restaurants in the meatpacking district and in Miami.”

We can understand why – when a writer comes in for dinner, either on their own or with a publicist, why shouldn’t they pay, just like a regular customer? They gets to eat delicious food!

We thought we’d offer up a mini-case study to demonstrate how a “free meal” might look from the writer’s perspective, and to highlight the potential long-term value that can come from this comped transaction.

One of our account managers brought a freelance food and lifestyle writer to a client’s restaurant. The writer was doing general research for a future article in a local magazine, and also wanted to get familiar with this restaurant in an effort to stay abreast of the scene at large.  The writer’s agenda was just discovery, nothing specific.

The next week, this writer got an assignment from The New York Times (to keep this anecdote anonymous, let’s say the topic was vegetarian lunches). Though the writer hadn’t been assigned the Times story at the time of their free meal, they now have our restaurant fresh in their mind and in fact, while there, they had gotten a chance to learn that the vegetarian lunch menu looked excellent. So who do you think will be one of the examples in the Times story?

But let’s be clear: with a serious writer, it’s never a case of quid pro quo. This writer is not including our restaurant in the article as thanks for the free meal. They’re including it because the restaurant is a perfect fit for the story. The reason they knows it’s a perfect fit is because they now have a fresh, first-hand experience as a reference.

And the reason the writer was able to get that experience was because the meal was comped. There are very few writers, if any, who can afford to pay full freight to eat and drink in all the places they need to know about. Bigger publications have dining budgets, so their writers generally don’t accept comps, which makes it even easier for everyone, but the freelance world isn’t so (and those dining budgets are shrinking, too).

So when a restaurant owner is authorizing that comp meal, they should remember that it’s not really a “free meal” to the writer, it’s a tool that lets them do their work.

Believe us, most freelancers would prefer NOT to be dining out on a Tuesday night with a publicist, turning a meal into a reporting session—even if the food is great. Sure, there may be a few genuine freeloaders in the world, but legitimate writers are out seeking information, not freebies. The writer is the advocate for their audience and they need to experience the same thing a paying customer will experience so they can write with authority. Whether that experience results in publicity for a restaurant in the short or long term, it’s always a good investment.

On August 1st The Oregonian reported that the Columbia River has experienced a sockeye salmon run that is “the highest since the Bonneville Dam started operating in 1938.”

photo courtesy of Bill Carter

For a little context I asked filmmaker & author Bill Carter what the average run is for the Egegik River in Bristol Bay, Alaska – the river he fished in his acclaimed memoir Red Summer.  He said during a typical year, fishermen on the Egegik will pull in close to ten million fish during a 30 day period!  Roll on Columbia, roll on!

But despite the relatively positive news, I wondered why this sudden abundance of Columbia River sockeye salmon?

To get some more insight I contacted David Finkel, Director of Development & Communications for Portland’s Wild Salmon Center, an organization whose mission is to identify, understand and protect the best wild salmon ecosystems of the entire Pacific Rim region.

Both Finkel and The Oregonian pointed out the abnormal run may be attributed to several factors including (court mandated) spillage over Columbia River dams and favorable ocean conditions.

Finkel added that many of the returning fish are of hatchery origin.  Therefore, they are not considered “wild” fish.

Initially you might be inclined to cast this as a victory for conservationists, or the complex network of hatcheries spanning much of the West Coast.  After all, these fish will bring valuable nutrients to ecosystems and fuel the local commercial fishing economy.

However, there is also a significant amount of science suggesting that the hatchery fish that are able to survive in the wild will develop less effective genetic traits as a result of what takes to survive in hatchery conditions – and when they return to spawn they leave fewer offspring than their wild relatives.  If you get those hatchery fish breeding with wild fish, then eventually the wild stock suffers.  For more information check out this article.

It’s a “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” scenario (no pun intended).  And it got me wondering about the long-term costs of our current hatchery system.  Will salmon evolve to become the cattle of the sea and become dependent on humans to nurture and manage every aspect of their existence?  Will we ever see ten million fish in the Columbia?

I don’t pretend to know the answer or to have any solution.

But I do know that in the meantime, David Finkel and the rest of the Wild Salmon Center crew are hard at work preserving the healthiest remaining wild salmon rivers in the entire Pacific Rim region.  For more information about their amazing work, check out their website.

Other organizations and people worth checking out:

SalmonAid – CA

Trout Unlimited – AK

Salmon Safe – OR

Wetlands Conservancy – OR

North Olympic Salmon Coalition – WA

Bill Carter – AZ