Yes, but on copper, the "initial bio" is not more advanced, as far as I know! Or I'm wrong ?
To understand a phenomenon, we must go back to its origins, which are less ecological than health, linked to the explosion of agrochemicals. It is therefore by reaction that AB will find its “modern” origin (a bit like alternative medicine is in reaction with chemical medicine too.)
It is therefore first of all an awareness, obviously, and philosophical too. However, as all these farmers come from agrochemistry (less developed than at present), who are concerned with this awareness, but at the same time anxious not to put themselves in danger in terms of their future crops which ensure their own subsistence) and therefore they are trapped between the hammer and the anvil; between not using it and losing their harvest or using it and risking the intoxication of consumers of which they are also a part.
you have to know all that, but not systematically all the gardeners who want to do more than organic for their health and avoid all legal products or not.
So DES (and not LES) new organic are turning to this type of agriculture, but not by health approach or particular philosophy, but because it is the profitable exit door (where they hope) that it pays better, compared to current agrochemicals, for small farmers.
We understand them moreover, but at the same time, the less individuals and systems are demanding, for themselves, and the more all the drifts are possible.
Are you aware of any questioning of the use of copper on the grounds that it is toxic for living organisms in the soil (including earthworms, from 250 ppm in the soil; the vineyard, 500 ppm)?
I'm not an organic farmer (and even a bad gardener, that's not my thing) But this toxicity precisely divided organic according to the philosophy that everyone shared. For example Nature et Progrès which I followed closely (literally) was opposed to the use of copper in systematic use with a few rare exceptions, mainly for land in conversion polluted by the remnants of previous crops. Everyone was groping for the right method with the Lemaire Boucher, Rusch with his fundamental work on "soil fertility (close to your method), Steiner with diodynamics, etc ... The ecology everyone is talking about now There was obviously a backdrop.
[apart from biodynamics, which is a rather particular "branch" of "organic" and which can be considered, in Germany / Switzerland, as being one of the "initial branches"]
absolutely ! It was a branch of this agriculture philosophically turned towards the priority to bring to human health as to that of soil and plants, the whole being
in symbiosis. Hence the energized preparations of plants and others, in a homeopathic way, and whose effects have been verified on their crops and therefore the reduction, even disappearance of parasites and cryptogamic diseases.
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré