Another farm under siege article

[QUOTE=Anne FS;8636817]
Yet again, No.

That was the point: most people eat animals. We eat animals. Here is how a responsible steward raises and treats the animals that sustain his family.

The entire point of the whole place is how this family sustains itself on the acreage that they have. That was the whole point: to show how they’re doing it.[/QUOTE]

But they aren’t doing it. Instead, it seems that they are presenting an idealized version of somebody’s concept of life on a farm (but instead is a place set up primarily for entertainment). That’s how they are making the majority of their money, not by actually farming.

It seems to me like we are talking apples to oranges. I think that the majority of people do realize that farms produce food and that cows produce the steaks that they buy at the market, and most (but not all) would accept it if it were presented factually as such. However, if the farm is presented more as a family fun experience/petting zoo/see the baby animals/arts and crafts/baby and mommy experience, in a way you can’t blame some people for feeling betrayed when it turns out to be something different. It’s a farm like a zoo is to the plains of Africa.

Perhaps we can at least agree that this farm’s basic marketing strategy was not as effective as it should have been, and perhaps the farmer was to some degree presenting his business in a way that may have not conveyed his original intent.

Not all business owners/business decisions are 100% correct all of the time.

Really, you don’t see that what you believe to be true education as you put it, is not telling him how to run his business? He owes you or the general public nothing. They pay to see the animals and whatever the farm chooses to teach that day. Would you feel better if you designed his lesson plans?

We sort of fixed this problem by naming our beef cattle with more obviously ends-oriented names. So we have Burger Boy the Eighth this year. He’s friendly, he’s pettable, no one is going to be confused about the end goal.

[QUOTE=myhorse;8636858]
Really, you don’t see that what you believe to be true education as you put it, is not telling him how to run his business? He owes you or the general public nothing. They pay to see the animals and whatever the farm chooses to teach that day. Would you feel better if you designed his lesson plans?[/QUOTE]

He actually does owe them something since they are the reason why he still has a farm in the first place!

XXXXD

SURE.

And there you have it!

[QUOTE=betonbill;8636857]But they aren’t doing it. Instead, it seems that they are presenting an idealized version of somebody’s concept of life on a farm (but instead is a place set up primarily for entertainment). That’s how they are making the majority of their money, not by actually farming.

It seems to me like we are talking apples to oranges. I think that the majority of people do realize that farms produce food and that cows produce the steaks that they buy at the market, and most (but not all) would accept it if it were presented factually as such. However, if the farm is presented more as a family fun experience/petting zoo/see the baby animals/arts and crafts/baby and mommy experience, in a way you can’t blame some people for feeling betrayed when it turns out to be something different. It’s a farm like a zoo is to the plains of Africa.

Perhaps we can at least agree that this farm’s basic marketing strategy was not as effective as it should have been, and perhaps the farmer was to some degree presenting his business in a way that may have not conveyed his original intent.

Not all business owners/business decisions are 100% correct all of the time.[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

It is entirely possible that either a mobile slaughter or a local abbatoir is the means to Minnie’s death and butchering. So how-to butcher is just not happening at this farm.

You really think it is appropriate to advertise/ photograph and post on-line someone else’s business without their permission? When that business is converting live animals to meat?

in an age and locale where FARTS are likely to go ballistic?
Farts are Fanatical Animal Rights Terrorists, for those who don’t already know.

Tell me another!

The farmer truthfully said his animal would feed his family -in response to the petitioner’s direct question.
This garners him a ranting on-line over reactor, death threats, picketers at his location…

Not a boycott.

[QUOTE=Red Barn;8636853]

What’s really so amazing about this? If we were talking about a dishonest car salesman or a crappy tennis camp, none of these Daydream Believers would be batting an eye.[/QUOTE]
Is that a pointed reference?

No one suggested he deserved getting death threats, but everything else is perfectly legal.

If he wanted to show what real homesteading is, he should be able to provide people with the full experience.

https://www.thehenryford.org/explore/blog/winter-in-greenfield-village-hanging-hams-bacon-and-fatback-at-firestone-farm

No one has ever gotten upset at Greenfield Village for slaughtering their stock but they have always been open about what the farm animals were raised for.

I am going to agree to disagree. He taught them what he wanted to, that is his right. You don’t have to like that he didn’t teach them A to Z, and instead stopped somewhere in the middle. Had the woman not asked the question, she would have enjoyed her visit. The farm being opened to the public is just that, to enjoy the day and maybe learn something new. Doesn’t mean it is his responsibility to teach everyone that comes to his place everything there is about farming. They are there for what a day, maybe even hours. Only so much can be taught during that time. He has chosen to not shock children by saying see the cow, now we are going to kill it and eat it. Who wants some?

"He actually does owe them something since they are the reason why he still has a farm in the first place! " -RodeoFTW

What was owed them was the opportunity offered. To pet and interact with the farm and animals; to attend his entertainment, classes, etc.

That is all. The people do not have an ownership interest in the farm or the animals or that family.

Entitled, are we?

I am never going to agree with you on that. He chose to show a particular ‘picture’ of a farm that was not accurate because he knew he could make money off of running a petting zoo… and eating said petting zoo without being upfront about it. It’s that simple.

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8636889]
No one suggested he deserved getting death threats, but everything else is perfectly legal.

If he wanted to show what real homesteading is, he should be able to provide people with the full experience.

https://www.thehenryford.org/explore/blog/winter-in-greenfield-village-hanging-hams-bacon-and-fatback-at-firestone-farm

No one has ever gotten upset at Greenfield Village for slaughtering their stock but they have always been open about what the farm animals were raised for.[/QUOTE]

Way to go to practice double standard…

It’s ok to bully people, as long as they do what you deem worthy of this scorn.
It is ok for some to kill their farm animals, but ot for others, the guidelines are ambiguous at best, mostly revolve around what you think of as right and proper.
Hey, why not advertise the 3 o’clock chicken butcher session…

It is alright in your book to be patronizing, even if, ore more so if one has no friggin idea what the subject matter is.

Farmers are not allowed to actually like their animals (but damn, if they dislike them!)

How dare he try to earn a living…

[QUOTE=Mosey_2003;8636911]
How dare he try to earn a living…[/QUOTE]

Under false pretenses, yeah.

Or perhaps he had a faulty business plan that wound up backfiring on him.

http://www.bedlamfarm.com/2016/01/12/joshuas-great-victory-its-over/

Here’s what everybody should be complaining about. This was a real farm with real animals that really got the shaft. Don’t remember anybody complaining for pages and pages about his situation.

“No one suggested he deserved getting death threats, but everything else is perfectly legal.”

Slander and libel legal?
Disorderly conduct?
Disturbing the peace?
Blocking traffic or pedestrian traffic?
Unpermitted demonstration?

Please!

No one on this thread has actually visited the farm to know what exactly is presented. Just because you see the website doesn’t mean you know what they really present.
It sounds like you want the website to have slaughter pictures on the front page of it.
And media outlets have reported that the business is not hurting and they had one of their busiest weekends last weekend.
As far as your idea of education transparrency where does it end? Do you expect when I give grade schoolers a tour of the clinic that they then must watch a dog spay? I am confused why you think that in order to be “genuine” one has to show everything/that might possibly happen on a farm. No other business has to meet those requirements.

I never suggested anything like that XD Slaughter pictures on the front page? Are you serious?

[QUOTE=betonbill;8636932]
Or perhaps he had a faulty business plan that wound up backfiring on him.

http://www.bedlamfarm.com/2016/01/12/joshuas-great-victory-its-over/

Here’s what everybody should be complaining about. This was a real farm with real animals that really got the shaft. Don’t remember anybody complaining for pages and pages about his situation.[/QUOTE]

He definitely got a raw deal.

False pretenses?

Are you serious?!

For pete’s sakes…

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8636680]
If he was smart, he wouldn’t have allowed people to become attached and invested in his future steak dinner.[/QUOTE]

Wouldn’t have allowed.

How many times did this woman visit his farm, in order to become attached to this cow? Attachment is not something he has any control over!

[QUOTE=Altermyne;8636964]
Wouldn’t have allowed.

How many times did this woman visit his farm, in order to become attached to this cow? Attachment is not something he has any control over![/QUOTE]

Actually, that’s very debatable.