CLOSE
Original image
iStock

4 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Feed the Birds (Or Any Animals)

Original image
iStock

People love to feed birds. And squirrels, chipmunks, deer—even bears and sharks. We do it for our own pleasure and, sometimes, under the misguided impression we are helping hungry animals. But step away from the stale bread—here are four reasons why feeding wildlife is almost always a bad idea, both for the animals and for us.

1. FEEDING CAN LEAD TO INJURED ANIMALS AND PEOPLE.

Researchers at Murdoch University in Western Australia and University of Aberdeen in Scotland analyzed nearly two decades worth of data from Chicago’s Brookfield Zoo Sarasota Dolphin Research Program and Mote Marine Laboratory’s Stranding Investigations Program and found an increase in the number of dolphins being fed by humans—along with an increase in dolphins injured or killed by boat strikes, entanglement in fishing gear, and ingestion of hooks and lines.

At Stingray City, a shallow lagoon off Grand Cayman where large numbers of stingrays gather around boats of tourists that feed them, handling by those tourists had caused skin abrasions on the rays.

Fed animals begin to equate humans with food, and can exhibit increased aggressiveness toward people, which has resulted in human injuries and even death. People have been bitten while feeding wild animals, some of which carry infectious diseases such as rabies, bubonic plague, or Hantavirus.

2. FEEDING ALTERS THE NATURAL BEHAVIOR OF ANIMALS.

Feeding wildlife can change the animals’ activity levels and metabolic rates, reduce the size of their home range, and increase both intra- and inter-species aggression.

Sharks, for example, don’t naturally share territory, and when they group around boats to feed, it can cause stress and shark-on-shark conflict. “Sharks are solitary predators not normally found in groups,” George Burgess, director of the Florida Program for Shark Research, told mental_floss. “With feeding, they associate humans in the water—and even the sound of a motor boat—with food, and come from long distances away. Most don’t go far away once the boat leaves, but hang out in the area knowing the boat comes every day, so the reality then is sharks in unusually high densities.” Unnaturally high numbers of predators in one place equals equally unnaturally high levels of predation, which affects the ecology of the entire area.

Whitetip reef sharks that are fed in order to attract them for tourists showed elevated activity levels and increased metabolic rates during times they normally would rest. Metabolism influences most of an animal’s biological and ecological processes, so this represents clear evidence of feeding affecting the sharks’ critical biological functions.

Researchers found that the rays at Stingray City have distinctly different patterns of activity than their wild counterparts. Wild stingrays forage at night across large distances and rarely encounter each other. The fed rays form schools, feed together, and mate year-round rather than during a specific season. They also show signs of unusual aggression, such as biting each other. Scientists don’t yet know whether these behavior changes could be harmful in the long run.

In Slovenia, where bears are fed corn year-round, scientists found that the animals shortened the number of days of hibernation by as much as 56 percent. Bears regularly visited feeding sites throughout the winter, increasing their likelihood of interactions with other species as well as humans.

3. FEEDING CAN MAKE ANIMALS SICK.

On some islands in the Bahamas and throughout the Caribbean, tourist operators take people to feed grapes, ground beef, and other foods to one of the world's most endangered lizards, northern Bahamian rock iguanas. Researchers reported different levels of calcium, cholesterol, and various minerals in fed versus unfed populations of the iguanas, as well as diarrhea, higher levels of glucose, and a staggering 100 percent endoparasitic infection rate in the tourist-fed animals. One of the study’s authors, Charles Knapp of the Chicago John G. Shedd Aquarium, recommends an education campaign to discourage iguana feeding and, at a minimum, using food specially formulated for the iguanas.

In another devastating example, people frequently feed bread, popcorn, and fast food to white ibis in parks in Georgia. As a result, the birds are more sedentary than normal, and they come into contact with ducks, gulls, and city birds they normally wouldn’t encounter. Increased inter-species contact, combined with higher levels of stress hormones and weaker immune systems, could increase the spread of pathogens such as salmonella among them. A previous study found ibises infected with strains of salmonella that also make people sick—because of their range, the birds could move these pathogens over large distances.

4. FEEDING CAN EVEN LEAD TO ANIMALS BEING KILLED.

All U.S. national parks prohibit the feeding of wildlife. But in some parks, bears have learned to forage for unattended human food. Rangers relocate these bears away from human food sources, but many eventually return and continue seeking human food—eventually, such problem bears must be euthanized. Being fed from cars can cause bears and other animals to congregate near roads where they may be killed by vehicles. Hanging around roads and parking lots can also make animals such as squirrels, birds, and deer easier for predators to catch.

Tourists on Fraser Island, Australia have come to expect interaction with dingoes, including feeding the wild dogs. As numbers of tourists increased, so have reports of dingo attacks, and after a human fatality in April 2001, the government ordered a cull of the dingoes.

Fed sharks lose their natural fear of humans and become bolder, coming closer than they normally would once they associate humans with food. When bites result, it contributes to the negative image sharks can have, Burgess says. “The sharks get the blame, not the humans in the water with bait and fish. We have a designation in the shark attack file, 'Provoked Attack,' meaning ones in which humans initiated the attack by doing something to provoke the animal. What is more provocative than dangling fish in front of a shark’s nose? Of course, the word provoked doesn’t appear in the headline. Whatever advantage is gained in conservation by letting people see what beautiful animals sharks are gets cancelled out by the headlines of someone getting bit.” In response to shark bites, officials sometimes kill sharks in the area where the encounter occurred even though, Burgess says, the chances of killing the specific shark involved are slim to none.

He notes that feeding can result in shark deaths another way: “There have been examples where fishermen came to areas where sharks were attracted by a feeding operation and fished them out."

Original image
iStock // Ekaterina Minaeva
technology
arrow
Man Buys Two Metric Tons of LEGO Bricks; Sorts Them Via Machine Learning
May 21, 2017
Original image
iStock // Ekaterina Minaeva

Jacques Mattheij made a small, but awesome, mistake. He went on eBay one evening and bid on a bunch of bulk LEGO brick auctions, then went to sleep. Upon waking, he discovered that he was the high bidder on many, and was now the proud owner of two tons of LEGO bricks. (This is about 4400 pounds.) He wrote, "[L]esson 1: if you win almost all bids you are bidding too high."

Mattheij had noticed that bulk, unsorted bricks sell for something like €10/kilogram, whereas sets are roughly €40/kg and rare parts go for up to €100/kg. Much of the value of the bricks is in their sorting. If he could reduce the entropy of these bins of unsorted bricks, he could make a tidy profit. While many people do this work by hand, the problem is enormous—just the kind of challenge for a computer. Mattheij writes:

There are 38000+ shapes and there are 100+ possible shades of color (you can roughly tell how old someone is by asking them what lego colors they remember from their youth).

In the following months, Mattheij built a proof-of-concept sorting system using, of course, LEGO. He broke the problem down into a series of sub-problems (including "feeding LEGO reliably from a hopper is surprisingly hard," one of those facts of nature that will stymie even the best system design). After tinkering with the prototype at length, he expanded the system to a surprisingly complex system of conveyer belts (powered by a home treadmill), various pieces of cabinetry, and "copious quantities of crazy glue."

Here's a video showing the current system running at low speed:

The key part of the system was running the bricks past a camera paired with a computer running a neural net-based image classifier. That allows the computer (when sufficiently trained on brick images) to recognize bricks and thus categorize them by color, shape, or other parameters. Remember that as bricks pass by, they can be in any orientation, can be dirty, can even be stuck to other pieces. So having a flexible software system is key to recognizing—in a fraction of a second—what a given brick is, in order to sort it out. When a match is found, a jet of compressed air pops the piece off the conveyer belt and into a waiting bin.

After much experimentation, Mattheij rewrote the software (several times in fact) to accomplish a variety of basic tasks. At its core, the system takes images from a webcam and feeds them to a neural network to do the classification. Of course, the neural net needs to be "trained" by showing it lots of images, and telling it what those images represent. Mattheij's breakthrough was allowing the machine to effectively train itself, with guidance: Running pieces through allows the system to take its own photos, make a guess, and build on that guess. As long as Mattheij corrects the incorrect guesses, he ends up with a decent (and self-reinforcing) corpus of training data. As the machine continues running, it can rack up more training, allowing it to recognize a broad variety of pieces on the fly.

Here's another video, focusing on how the pieces move on conveyer belts (running at slow speed so puny humans can follow). You can also see the air jets in action:

In an email interview, Mattheij told Mental Floss that the system currently sorts LEGO bricks into more than 50 categories. It can also be run in a color-sorting mode to bin the parts across 12 color groups. (Thus at present you'd likely do a two-pass sort on the bricks: once for shape, then a separate pass for color.) He continues to refine the system, with a focus on making its recognition abilities faster. At some point down the line, he plans to make the software portion open source. You're on your own as far as building conveyer belts, bins, and so forth.

Check out Mattheij's writeup in two parts for more information. It starts with an overview of the story, followed up with a deep dive on the software. He's also tweeting about the project (among other things). And if you look around a bit, you'll find bulk LEGO brick auctions online—it's definitely a thing!

Original image
Nick Briggs/Comic Relief
entertainment
arrow
What Happened to Jamie and Aurelia From Love Actually?
May 26, 2017
Original image
Nick Briggs/Comic Relief

Fans of the romantic-comedy Love Actually recently got a bonus reunion in the form of Red Nose Day Actually, a short charity special that gave audiences a peek at where their favorite characters ended up almost 15 years later.

One of the most improbable pairings from the original film was between Jamie (Colin Firth) and Aurelia (Lúcia Moniz), who fell in love despite almost no shared vocabulary. Jamie is English, and Aurelia is Portuguese, and they know just enough of each other’s native tongues for Jamie to propose and Aurelia to accept.

A decade and a half on, they have both improved their knowledge of each other’s languages—if not perfectly, in Jamie’s case. But apparently, their love is much stronger than his grasp on Portuguese grammar, because they’ve got three bilingual kids and another on the way. (And still enjoy having important romantic moments in the car.)

In 2015, Love Actually script editor Emma Freud revealed via Twitter what happened between Karen and Harry (Emma Thompson and Alan Rickman, who passed away last year). Most of the other couples get happy endings in the short—even if Hugh Grant's character hasn't gotten any better at dancing.

[h/t TV Guide]

SECTIONS
BIG QUESTIONS
BIG QUESTIONS
WEATHER WATCH
BE THE CHANGE
JOB SECRETS
QUIZZES
WORLD WAR 1
SMART SHOPPING
STONES, BONES, & WRECKS
#TBT
THE PRESIDENTS
WORDS
RETROBITUARIES