Very Disappointed @ BB

Perhaps we should follow the advice of one particular writer who submitted a letter to the editor:

Talk about naive... I don't get to hunt this year, we're half way through a move to Wisconsin and havn't changed identities yet, so the license fee would be 10X normal. Not worth the cost! But I'll be there next year, fish, small game, deer, the works! Have a freezer to fill with the freshest food on the planet!

 

In an old SiFi story the people ate cloned meat grown in big chemical vats - it was from human DNA.

 

Where no animals were hurt to make it? LOL Too funny...

Let's see...if it's bought at a regular mass retailer, the poor animal probably lived in crowded, unnatural conditions and was fed food it wouldn't normally eat, pumped full of antibiotics to combat diseases that are prevalent when you put animals in such unnatural conditions, plus pumped full of hormones to make it become nice and big for a higher profit.

An animal shot during hunting has lived in freedom its whole life, grazing on foods that are natural to their diet and of their choice, happy and carefree.

Which scenario most likely would be more harmful to an animal?

 

Scenerio #1 IS the more harmful

Thats why its more healthier to eat things that are found in Mr. McGregor's garden!!!!!!!!

The cattle that are "free range"----fed nothing but the grass under its feet(hooves) are gonna taste different than the beef you buy at the store

Tom Turkey free ranges in the wild-----is gonna taste different than his cousin who was raised for Butterball Enterprises!!