Dangerous duck feet! A new farm hazard.

Just in case you missed this!  I will refrain from making the obvious puns. 

• print

• Email this article

|

• MORE

ESTACADA, Ore. – A Washington woman said she was attacked by a duck with “abnormally dangerous propensities” and is seeking $275,000 in damages, according to court documents obtained by kgw.com.

Cynthia Ruddell said she fell down while trying to escape from the dangerous duck, injuring her right wrist and rotator cuff, according to documents filed with Clackamas County civil court.

Ruddell was leaving her motor home parked on land in Estacada owned by her mother when a duck owned by Lolita Rose assailed her, documents said.

The filing, prepared by attorney Gregory Price of Vancouver, said Rose needlessly endangered the public when she failed to maintain control of her animal, failed to keep her duck on her own property and failed to warn neighbors of “her duck’s dangerous propensity” to attack people.

Ruddell is seeking damages of $275,000 for medical expenses, “pain, suffering, inconvenience, humiliation” and interference with her normal activities that resulted from the accident.

Rose was responsible for Ruddell’s injuries and should have known she had an “abnormally dangerous” duck, documents said.

http://www.kgw.com/news/Woman-wants-275K-after-attack-with-abnormally-dangerous-duck-256259841.html

Crop insurance

I've been reading up on crop insurance and federal subsidies. From what I can see, the real reason for the current system of crop insurance is not there to benefit the farmers, but rather to make lots of money for the insurance companies. Go into any town, large or small, and the largest building in town will nine times out of ten, be an insurance building. (My statistics) These guys aren't in business to give money away despite what they will tell you.


Here is an interesting read on the subject: Farm Subsidy Primer

And perhaps a solution:  Giving It Away 

"If the current system of crop insurance isn't working, why not abolish it along with direct payments and redirect the $13 billion in combined annual savings to shrink the deficit and create a truly cost-effective program? Since 2001, the current crop insurance program has cost taxpayers about $50 billion, but only half –$25 billion – has found its way into farmers’ pockets. The other $25 billion wound up in the coffers of crop insurance companies and in commissions paid to insurance agents. It strains credibility to claim that a program that costs $2 to deliver $1 of benefits is a wise use of taxpayer funds."