I don't know which is more important between "free-range" and
"hormone-antibiotic free". I would only eat conventional chicken on rare
occasions, but would not consider purchasing chicken with hormones and
antibiotics. As far as "free-range" is concerned, I don't think that is
a very meaningful term. I know of an organic egg company that says "free
range", but what they mean is that the chickens can walk around inside
the barn rather than being confined to individual cages. Even a chicken
farm that lets them outside might only be letting them out into a barren
dirt barnyard where they would have little to no foraging opportunities.
What you really want is pastured chickens, where they get to forage in
new territory on some kind of cycle which gives them access to various
plants, bugs and worms as supplements to their grain diet. We just got
nine more layers today for a total of eighteen. If they don't all start
killing each other when the sun comes up we should be getting plenty of
good eggs. They will eat all the scraps from our kitchen and garden.


Madeline Mason wrote:
>
> Just came back from the supermarket and found, in addition to the usual
> commercial chicken, 2 brands (Murray's and Bell and Evans) that say, "No
> hormones or antibiotics, minimal processing." These are the brands I usually
> buy, although they do NOT profess to be free range.  I also saw whole
> chickens with no brand name, that just said, "Free range barnyard chickens"
> but didn't say anything about not using any hormones or antibiotics. Nothing
> else at all was on the label other than the usual weight, price, and "safe
> handling" warning. Anybody have any comments?  Which is better, free range,
> or no hormones but not free range?
>
> Maddy Mason
> Hudson Valley, NY