OT- The sign says...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mark_digital, Sep 23, 2004.

  1. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    Recently I was in New Hamphire enjoying a day at a public rest area/beach.
    After taking some snapshots of my grandchildren I settled down at a picnic
    table and munched on chips and drank some soda. Behind me was the paved
    parking lot, I'm sitting on a grassy area, and in front of me about 50 feet away
    is the beach. There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and
    don'ts and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of the rules was
    to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to the seagulls. I noticed a
    woman by a swingset on her cell phone staring at me. In about 10 minutes there
    was a police cruiser in the parking lot.
    When I packed up and drove away he did too.
    I thought to myself if the sign meant for the whole area then it should have been
    placed not at the beginning of the beach but instead where the rest area meets the
    parking lot. This was going to be my arguement if the officer had tried to fine me.
    Come to think about, it would have thrown me for a loop if he was there because
    I was taking pictures and not because I fed the birds.

    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. mark_digital

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and don'ts
    > and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of the rules was
    > to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to the seagulls. I
    > noticed a woman by a swingset on her cell phone staring at me. In about
    > 10 minutes there was a police cruiser in the parking lot. When I packed
    > up and drove away he did too. I thought to myself if the sign meant for
    > the whole area then it should have been placed not at the beginning of
    > the beach but instead where the rest area meets the parking lot. This
    > was going to be my arguement if the officer had tried to fine me.


    They're not telling you not to feed the waterfowl as some kind of silly
    arbitrary rule. They're telling you not to feed them because it is bad
    to feed wild animals -- bad for the animals, that is. So how about if
    you just don't do that, instead of getting all in a huff about which
    area the sign applies to?

    --
    Jeremy |
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. mark_digital

    Frank ess Guest

    Jeremy Nixon wrote:
    > mark_digital <> wrote:
    >
    >> There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and
    >> don'ts and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of
    >> the rules was to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to
    >> the seagulls. I noticed a woman by a swingset on her cell phone
    >> staring at me. In about 10 minutes there was a police cruiser in the
    >> parking lot. When I packed up and drove away he did too. I thought
    >> to myself if the sign meant for the whole area then it should have
    >> been placed not at the beginning of the beach but instead where the
    >> rest area meets the parking lot. This was going to be my arguement
    >> if the officer had tried to fine me.

    >
    > They're not telling you not to feed the waterfowl as some kind of
    > silly arbitrary rule. They're telling you not to feed them because
    > it is bad to feed wild animals -- bad for the animals, that is. So
    > how about if you just don't do that, instead of getting all in a huff
    > about which
    > area the sign applies to?


    You're not going to make a dent in the skull of someone whose judgement
    leads him to violate rules and common sense, and then post his whinge on
    Usenet.

    Watch for the explosion.

    --
    Frank ess
     
    Frank ess, Sep 23, 2004
    #3
  4. mark_digital

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Frank ess <> wrote:

    > You're not going to make a dent in the skull of someone whose judgement
    > leads him to violate rules and common sense, and then post his whinge on
    > Usenet.


    *sigh* you're right, of course.

    --
    Jeremy |
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 23, 2004
    #4
  5. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    "Frank ess" <> wrote in message news:...
    Jeremy Nixon wrote:
    > mark_digital <> wrote:
    >
    >> There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and
    >> don'ts and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of
    >> the rules was to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to
    >> the seagulls. I noticed a woman by a swingset on her cell phone
    >> staring at me. In about 10 minutes there was a police cruiser in the
    >> parking lot. When I packed up and drove away he did too. I thought
    >> to myself if the sign meant for the whole area then it should have
    >> been placed not at the beginning of the beach but instead where the
    >> rest area meets the parking lot. This was going to be my arguement
    >> if the officer had tried to fine me.

    >
    > They're not telling you not to feed the waterfowl as some kind of
    > silly arbitrary rule. They're telling you not to feed them because
    > it is bad to feed wild animals -- bad for the animals, that is. So
    > how about if you just don't do that, instead of getting all in a huff
    > about which
    > area the sign applies to?


    You're not going to make a dent in the skull of someone whose judgement
    leads him to violate rules and common sense, and then post his whinge on
    Usenet.

    Watch for the explosion.

    --
    Frank ess
    --------------------
    --------------------
    Why is it bad to feed the waterfowl? I feed the birds in my backyard
    all the time. Don't we owe them something for limiting their space or do
    you just want the world to be infested with humans so you can be mean
    to your own kind?

    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 23, 2004
    #5
  6. mark_digital

    Böwsér Guest

    "mark_digital" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and
    >don'ts and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of the rules
    >was
    >to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to the seagulls.


    You're kidding, right? How could you misinterpret this?
     
    Böwsér, Sep 23, 2004
    #6
  7. mark_digital

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > Why is it bad to feed the waterfowl? I feed the birds in my backyard
    > all the time. Don't we owe them something for limiting their space


    Deliberately doing them harm is not among the things that we owe them.

    Are you really asking out of ignorance? If so, I'll explain.

    Have you ever wondered why it is illegal to feed wildlife in all parks,
    national and state forests, etc? Why the National Park Service will put
    you in jail for it?

    Because it's very, very bad for the animals, for a wide variety of reasons.
    I'll give you some, in case you really didn't know about this.

    Human food is not good for animals. The extent to which it is bad varies
    from one species to another, but in general they cannot live on it -- for
    the same reason you give your dog special "dog food" and you give your cat
    special "cat food" and your dog can't live on cat food and vice-versa.
    Human food can cause serious health problems in wild animals. It can cause
    different bacteria to form in their stomachs that hinders digestion and can
    result in the animal starving to death with a full stomach. Some of the
    additives in human food can be addictive to an animal, so he will seek it
    out even though it cannot sustain his life and he will starve to death.

    Once an animal becomes used to being provided with human food, if that
    food is not provided he may not know how to provide his own food.

    Animals fed by humans lose their fear of humans and become aggressive
    toward humans, because the humans have taught them that aggressive
    behavior leads to being fed. Aggressive animals can and have killed
    people looking for food. And what do people do to aggressive animals?
    Kill them, of course, to prevent the aggressive behavior that they
    themselves have taught the animals.

    Animals fed by humans tend to congregate in small areas where humans
    will feed them. This unnaturally dense population encourages the spread
    of disease among the animal population. This also often coincides with
    areas where there are roads and highways, and the animals end up getting
    hit by cars.

    Animals that hibernate for the winter need a certain diet. Human food
    doesn't provide them what they need -- they become unable to survive
    the winter and they die.

    Is that enough for you?

    --
    Jeremy |
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 23, 2004
    #7
  8. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    "Jeremy Nixon" <> wrote in message news:...
    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > Why is it bad to feed the waterfowl? I feed the birds in my backyard
    > all the time. Don't we owe them something for limiting their space


    Deliberately doing them harm is not among the things that we owe them.

    Are you really asking out of ignorance? If so, I'll explain.

    -------------------------
    -------------------------

    You might think I was trying to feed them coffee.
    Fact is wildlife is accustomed to eating just about anything we
    may bring to a picnic. If you said the salt in the chips isn't
    good for them because it can dehydrate them, then OK
    you have a point if there isn't water for them to drink.
    Waterfowl not having water to drink? C'mon.

    The rule about feeding is absolute and doesn't make
    distinction. Next time you're caught driving over the
    speed limit let's hope the cop is reasonable enough
    to hear your rational and maybe he won't follow the
    law as an absolute.

    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 23, 2004
    #8
  9. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    "Böwsér" <> wrote in message news:NlH4d.245433$mD.39932@attbi_s02...

    "mark_digital" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and
    >don'ts and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of the rules
    >was
    >to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to the seagulls.


    You're kidding, right? How could you misinterpret this?
    --------------------------------------------------------
    I understand why not to feed them if you're on the beach.
    But at the same token, eating on the beach shouldn't be
    allowed either. People leave trash and as far as I'm
    concerned, trash is more likely to harm wildlife than
    bits of white bread.
    My point is this; a sign must be in a logical location.
    It doesn't necessarilly have to contain logical rules
    and regulations. That's a matter for a later date.

    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 23, 2004
    #9
  10. mark_digital

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > You might think I was trying to feed them coffee.


    You might not realize that you have *no idea* what kinds of food may be
    good or bad for any particular species of wild animal.

    Try feeding dog food to your cat for a while and see how interchangeable
    items of food are.

    > Fact is wildlife is accustomed to eating just about anything we
    > may bring to a picnic.


    Can you understand that them being accustomed to it is a *problem* for them?

    > If you said the salt in the chips isn't good for them because it can
    > dehydrate them, then OK you have a point if there isn't water for them
    > to drink. Waterfowl not having water to drink? C'mon.


    Salt is the worst thing in a chip, for a bird? Based on what, your
    assumption that their digestive system and nutritional requirements are
    the same as a human's?

    By the way, I think your basic assumptions about salt may be slightly off
    as well, even with regard to humans. Did you know that, when hiking in
    the desert, it is imperative that you eat a lot of very salty food? Do
    you think they tell you that because they want you to die of dehydration?
    No, they tell you that because they want you to live.

    > The rule about feeding is absolute and doesn't make
    > distinction.


    That is correct; the reason for that is because a law that laid out what
    specific food items are safe for which species of animal would be too
    complex to be either followed or enforced.

    > Next time you're caught driving over the speed limit let's hope the
    > cop is reasonable enough to hear your rational and maybe he won't follow
    > the law as an absolute.


    Next time you're tempted to feed wild animals in a natural area you might
    want to consider the fact that you are doing them harm, and reconsider.

    The laws against feeding wildlife are there for a reason, and that reason
    is not to annoy you, and it is not because the legislators hate animals and
    want to stamp out nature everywhere. It is for the benefit of the animals.
    If you don't know that, then fine, but having it explained to you and still
    refusing to accept it because you want to feed the cute little animals is
    *not* a way to have respect for nature.

    If you don't believe me, spend a few minutes at Google searching on the
    topic. It's all well-documented by people with actual scientific
    credentials, which admittedly I do not have.

    --
    Jeremy |
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 24, 2004
    #10
  11. mark_digital

    Böwsér Guest

    "mark_digital" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    "Böwsér" <> wrote in message
    news:NlH4d.245433$mD.39932@attbi_s02...

    "mark_digital" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >There's a sign where the beach area begins listing the do's and
    >don'ts and what will happen if you don't oblige the rules. One of the rules
    >was
    >to not feed the waterfowl. I threw some chips out to the seagulls.


    You're kidding, right? How could you misinterpret this?
    --------------------------------------------------------
    >I understand why not to feed them if you're on the beach.


    Why would it make a difference? The sign, clearly posted, says not to feed
    them. You fed them. Why?

    >But at the same token, eating on the beach shouldn't be
    >allowed either. People leave trash and as far as I'm
    >concerned, trash is more likely to harm wildlife than
    >bits of white bread.


    Yes it is. But I bet the sign said something about that, too. It isn't the
    bread that harms the gulls, it's their reliance on humans for food. When the
    humans go home for the winter, so does the food. The gulls starve. And I
    doubt littering is legal, either.

    >My point is this; a sign must be in a logical location.


    Like right where the beach begins, in plain sight where you saw it and read
    it?

    >It doesn't necessarilly have to contain logical rules
    >and regulations. That's a matter for a later date.


    Don't feed wild animals. Seems logical enough. I'm sorry, I simply cannot
    understand how anyone could misinterpret this. It's a plain as day.
     
    Böwsér, Sep 24, 2004
    #11
  12. mark_digital wrote:

    > My point is this


    Sod off, "mark". All you do is whine and argue.

    And you can't set a standard newsreader.

    --

    John McWilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Sep 24, 2004
    #12
  13. mark_digital

    Big Bill Guest

    On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:45:32 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <>
    wrote:

    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > Why is it bad to feed the waterfowl? I feed the birds in my backyard
    > all the time. Don't we owe them something for limiting their space


    Those who feed birds intheir backyards generally do one of two things:
    they throw out some bread scraps, or:
    They do a little study and determine what food the birds need, and
    what foods the birds will be attracted by.
    The second group is not hurting the birds by feeding them food they
    wouldn't normally get. In fact, by varying the types of food to
    attract more bird species, they are offering what the birds would
    normally find anyway.
    The first group is usually not feeding enough to make a difference,
    but they aren't doing the birds any favors.

    Bird feeders are a great way to get the birds to a place where you can
    take pics of them (obligitory camera stuff).

    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
     
    Big Bill, Sep 24, 2004
    #13
  14. Jeremy Nixon <> writes:

    > mark_digital <> wrote:
    >
    > > You might think I was trying to feed them coffee.

    >
    > You might not realize that you have *no idea* what kinds of food may be
    > good or bad for any particular species of wild animal.
    >
    > Try feeding dog food to your cat for a while and see how interchangeable
    > items of food are.


    While I agree with your point, in our house, the cats graze eating dog food,
    and the dog cleans up the cat food.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Sep 24, 2004
    #14
  15. mark_digital

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Big Bill <> wrote:

    > Bird feeders are a great way to get the birds to a place where you can
    > take pics of them (obligitory camera stuff).


    Bird feeders are providing bird food, and not from a human hand, both of
    which make a significant difference -- and they don't normally exist in
    wild areas where animal behavior changes can be deadly.

    --
    Jeremy |
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 24, 2004
    #15
  16. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    "John McWilliams" <> wrote in message news:evJ4d.246823$mD.200506@attbi_s02...
    mark_digital wrote:

    > My point is this


    Sod off, "mark". All you do is whine and argue.

    And you can't set a standard newsreader.

    --

    John McWilliams
    ------------------------
    ------------------------
    What are you barking about, John?

    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 24, 2004
    #16
  17. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    "Big Bill" <> wrote in message news:...
    On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:45:32 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <>
    wrote:

    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > Why is it bad to feed the waterfowl? I feed the birds in my backyard
    > all the time. Don't we owe them something for limiting their space


    Those who feed birds intheir backyards generally do one of two things:
    they throw out some bread scraps, or:
    They do a little study and determine what food the birds need, and
    what foods the birds will be attracted by.
    The second group is not hurting the birds by feeding them food they
    wouldn't normally get. In fact, by varying the types of food to
    attract more bird species, they are offering what the birds would
    normally find anyway.
    The first group is usually not feeding enough to make a difference,
    but they aren't doing the birds any favors.

    Bird feeders are a great way to get the birds to a place where you can
    take pics of them (obligitory camera stuff).

    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
    -----------------------------------
    -----------------------------------
    Thank you for being civil in your response.
    About 10 miles from where I live there's a landfill that towers
    over 60 feet above the main entry road. Birds and all sorts of
    wild animals are always up there feeding on the worst stuff
    imagineable. I see no effort in curtailing this from happening.

    But again, my original point was about the location of the sign.

    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 24, 2004
    #17
  18. mark_digital

    mark_digital Guest

    "Jeremy Nixon" <> wrote in message news:...
    Salt is the worst thing in a chip, for a bird? Based on what, your
    assumption that their digestive system and nutritional requirements are
    the same as a human's?
    Jeremy
    ------

    No. Based on information my son told me about salted peanuts.
    My son has a bachelor's degree in environmental science/biology.
    After he advised me I switched to unsalted peanuts for squirrels
    and blue jays.

    mark_
    ---------
    ---------

    By the way, I think your basic assumptions about salt may be slightly off
    as well, even with regard to humans. Did you know that, when hiking in
    the desert, it is imperative that you eat a lot of very salty food? Do
    you think they tell you that because they want you to die of dehydration?
    No, they tell you that because they want you to live.

    Jeremy
    -------------
    -------------
    I think you may have skimmed the article you got your information from
    too fast, possibly overlooking the word fluid in conjunction with salt.
    Animals of types and sizes perspire differently than us. Yes, they can
    become dehydrated when their natural source has frozen over, for
    example, rain gutters.
    Jeremy, let me be clear about this. If I was eating an apple and I wanted
    to slice offa few bits for the seagull, there's no harm at all. Fact is, the
    birds have become accustomed to knowing that where there are humans
    there is food. Just being on the beach attracts the birds. Birds watch us
    pretty much like we watch them. They know we have to eat too.
    I have a few pictures of a grey jay landing on a person's head to pick off
    a dorito chip.


    mark_
     
    mark_digital, Sep 24, 2004
    #18
  19. mark_digital

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    mark_digital <> wrote:

    > My son has a bachelor's degree in environmental science/biology.


    That's nice. If you actually knew the details of this stuff enough to
    know what food isn't bad for which animal, you would understand why you're
    not supposed to feed the animals, you wouldn't complain about the perceived
    arbitrary law against it, and you wouldn't be under the impression that
    the restriction has to do with whether or not you're on the beach. Your
    statements to this point clearly demonstrate that you have no idea what
    you're talking about, though.

    > Jeremy, let me be clear about this. If I was eating an apple and I wanted
    > to slice offa few bits for the seagull, there's no harm at all. Fact is,
    > the birds have become accustomed to knowing that where there are humans
    > there is food.


    And that is part of the problem.

    If you want to be an asshole and abuse the animals, I can't stop you, but
    if you complain about this in a group of photographers, more likely than
    average to actually care about and respect nature, you're likely to rouse
    the annoyance of someone like me, so deal with it. And you'd better
    believe that I won't let it go if I ever see you doing it, either.

    --
    Jeremy |
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Sep 24, 2004
    #19
  20. mark_digital

    Jer Guest

    Jeremy Nixon wrote:
    > mark_digital <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>My son has a bachelor's degree in environmental science/biology.

    >
    >
    > That's nice. If you actually knew the details of this stuff enough to
    > know what food isn't bad for which animal, you would understand why you're
    > not supposed to feed the animals, you wouldn't complain about the perceived
    > arbitrary law against it, and you wouldn't be under the impression that
    > the restriction has to do with whether or not you're on the beach. Your
    > statements to this point clearly demonstrate that you have no idea what
    > you're talking about, though.
    >
    >
    >>Jeremy, let me be clear about this. If I was eating an apple and I wanted
    >>to slice offa few bits for the seagull, there's no harm at all. Fact is,
    >>the birds have become accustomed to knowing that where there are humans
    >>there is food.

    >
    >
    > And that is part of the problem.
    >
    > If you want to be an asshole and abuse the animals, I can't stop you, but
    > if you complain about this in a group of photographers, more likely than
    > average to actually care about and respect nature, you're likely to rouse
    > the annoyance of someone like me, so deal with it. And you'd better
    > believe that I won't let it go if I ever see you doing it, either.
    >


    As a diver, I'll stop it. Feeding wildlife promotes unatural behaviour,
    even if that behaviour only persisted for a short time afterward. Is
    this what anyone wants? Do we really want to cram our photo libraries
    full of images of amimals acting unnaturally? These animals aren't our
    property, they weren't put here for our entertainment, and they
    certainly don't deserve being tricked into any situation that
    jeopardizes their future.

    Story time...
    One day last year, I had a small group of divers on my boat, and having
    observed one with a sandwich bag of leftover breakfast, I also overheard
    what this individual was intending to do. After explaining the rules
    (again) that exist for everybody on my boat, I asked this person to
    leave his bag behind so he could finish it himself later on. He
    appeared to comply and nothing more was said. During the group dive, I
    observed this same individual with his bag attempting to do exactly what
    I had asked, and what we agreed, he shouldn't do. After recovering all
    divers, I piloted the boat to the nearest open shoreline area and asked
    this individual to disembark. He did, and I figure he had about 6km
    walk ahead of him.


    --
    jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
    "All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
    what we know." -- Richard Wilbur
     
    Jer, Sep 24, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Quaoar

    Re: No sign of wireless life

    Quaoar, Sep 9, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,889
    Quaoar
    Sep 21, 2004
  2. area51
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    537
    Leonidas Jones
    Dec 13, 2003
  3. Bobby Fischler
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,916
    Bobby Fischler
    Jul 24, 2004
  4. Harold Potter esq.

    J sign instead of ? sign

    Harold Potter esq., Apr 15, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,608
    Harold Potter esq.
    Apr 16, 2005
  5. PWB

    $ sign to gb pound sign

    PWB, Feb 18, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    3,015
    chuckie®
    Feb 19, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page