[QUOTE=betonbill;8636563]
I think the farm owner clearly wanted to have his cake and eat it too. I looked at the website and didn’t see anything clearly stated that this was also a working farm. It IS presented as a fun way to spend a day or a weekend petting baby animals or planting vegetables.
I think we can talk till the cows come home about how ignorant city/town people are these days about where our food comes from, but the emphasis from the webpage definitely was NOT about trying to explain sustainable farming to its visitors. Instead, it was come out and have fun petting baby animals, winding ribbons around a Maypole, and other rural fun things.
After looking at the website, I can see how some of the visitors might feel betrayed or misled. This in no way, shape, or form justifies threats to the farmer, but I would agree that the language used by the website was misleading and in no way reflected the circle of life and death of a working farm/ranch.[/QUOTE]
I know, right?
This continued insistence that a phoney-assed theme park is actually a “working farm” is just getting weirder and weirder. And the idea that this blatant tourist trap exists solely to educate stoopit city folks about the realities of food production . . . well. How old are these people?
If I hadn’t been following this crazy and wonderful thread for days on end, I’d surely have assumed that Benner’s weepy defenders were themselves a bunch of oddly gullible middle schoolers, and his critics the only people who’d actually visited the real world.