From earlier today: it's interesting, that for most of the chicken's history with people, they were kept primarily for eggs, not meat (up until WWII or so, chicken meat was the sunday/occasional delicacy, not an everyday staple), and WERE valuable to most people -- they just didn't necessarily see all the biological relationships between food and egg-laying and molting patterns. i'm not sure one can compare modern understanding of nutrition and disease and etc. to past times & conclude that people cared or valued less? because chickens, like pigs and most other livestock, have always been in the role of taking resources people otherwise wouldn't/couldn't really use & turning those into something useful -- with cattle/sheep/goats, it's eating grass that our digestive systems can't process and transforming it into something we can use (meat, wool, milk, etc), and with pigs and chickens, it was mostly eating our refuse & leftovers, as well as free-ranging on their own, & transforming those into eggs and bacon. so handy! and most definitely valued. pardon me; it's the first week of classes, i'm teaching environmental history (among other things), and hence you get a lecture. i'll do my best to restrain the impulse! and most backyard chickens are certainly better looked-after today than they ever were in the past -- i just don't want us to think that it's because we care MORE, we just have better biological/medical understanding of their needs, and perhaps care about slightly different priorities. and happy birthday amy beth!! best, laura