Orcas are bringing humans gifts of food – but why?
One of the orcas, a juvenile female, 'approached a camera I had in the water to film her younger brother and then opened her mouth and let out a dead seabird,' Towers, the executive director of Bay Cetology, a Canadian team of marine biologists based in Alert Bay, British Columbia, told CNN.
She closed her mouth, paused, apparently watching for Towers' reaction and hung in the water while the dead seabird floated up above her. Then, after a few seconds, she rolled around towards the camera and swallowed the bird again.
A few years later, Towers saw another young female killer whale displaying the same behavior – this time, however, the orca 'dropped a freshly killed harbor seal pup right beside my boat.'
Towers discussed these incidents with his colleagues around the world, discovering that they too had been gifted food by killer whales.
When he collated the instances, he found 34 cases of killer whales presenting humans with food between 2004 and 2024.
He and his colleagues laid out their findings in a paper published recently in the Journal of Comparative Psychology where they attempt to unravel the reasons why killer whales might be doing this.
Perhaps, they hypothesized, the killer whales are curious and exploring how humans will react to a gift. Maybe they are playing, though they largely discount this theory because whales of all ages, rather than just juveniles, provisioned food. Or, perhaps it is something more sinister – killer whales have been known to use prey to attract other species and then kill them, but there is no record of orcas ever killing humans in the wild.
'I don't think it's easy to suggest there is one reason for this behavior because there are underlying mechanisms and proximate causes,' Towers said.
'The main underlying mechanism is simply that they can afford to offer us food and the main proximate cause may be that they are doing so as a way to explore and subsequently learn more about us.'
In all but one of the cases documented, the killer whales initially waited for a response from the humans before most of them retrieved the food, though some simply abandoned it and some even tried to gift it again.
The humans ignored the food almost all the time; they took it only four times and in three of those cases, they threw it back into the water afterward.
Pets bring their owners gifts – think of the dead mice or birds that cats leave outside the door – and animals have been observed giving gifts to each other. But until now, there have been barely any recorded cases of wild predators giving gifts to humans, aside from a few instances of false killer whales – a species of dolphin – and leopard seals offering people food.
'In a way, it's not surprising, because… everybody who's on the water with (killer whales) has experienced how inquisitive and curious they are and have had interactions where you know there's something going on between us and them,' Hanne Strager, a researcher and author who wrote 'The Killer Whale Journals,' who wasn't involved in the study, told CNN.
Killer whales are one of the most intelligent animals; only humans have a larger brain relative to their body size, according to the study. And they kill much larger animals relative to their own body size than other whales and dolphins, meaning they can have more food to share around.
They are also believed to have spindle neurons in their brains – a type of neuron known to be associated with empathy – said Philippa Brakes, a behavioral ecologist at the University of Exeter specializing in whales and dolphins who wasn't involved in the study.
While she added that determining motivation is difficult 'because we can't interview them,' she suggested to CNN that it could be 'altruistic' or just a 'basic biological function' mimicking 'something you might do to a juvenile.'
The researchers found that it didn't matter where in the world the whale was or whether it was male or female, a calf, a juvenile or adult – they all displayed this behavior.
It fits into a wider pattern of killer whales often initiating interactions with humans and boats, offering further insight into their lives.
And Towers hopes it serves as a reminder that 'while our species is obviously more technologically advanced than any other on the planet, we do share it with other highly evolved species whose welfare must be considered in our actions.'
Call to Earth is a CNN editorial series committed to reporting on the environmental challenges facing our planet, together with the solutions. Rolex's Perpetual Planet Initiative has partnered with CNN to drive awareness and education around key sustainability issues and to inspire positive action.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists make alarming discovery after attaching GoPro cameras to polar bears in the Arctic — here's what's happening
Scientists make alarming discovery after attaching GoPro cameras to polar bears in the Arctic — here's what's happening The large amounts of melting sea ice due to rising global temperatures are impacting polar bears' ability to hunt for seals, forcing them to adapt to new ways of finding food. However, these alternative food options are much less nutritious and scarce, resulting in cases of alarming weight loss, Glass Almanac reported. What's happening? A group of Canadian scientists attached GoPro cameras to GPS collars on 20 polar bears in the Hudson Bay area in northeastern Canada. The scientists studied the footage and observed how polar bears are adapting to rapidly melting sea ice. Over three years, the scientists observed how polar bears are collectively losing an alarming amount of weight. Of the 20 bears studied, 19 lost an average of 46 pounds over three weeks, according to Glass Almanac. The loss of sea ice directly affects the bears' ability to hunt for seals, an important food source that provides the bears with high-fat food for energy and warmth, allowing the bears to weather the cold, hunt for more food, and survive. The footage shows the polar bears increasingly turning to food on land as hunting for seals becomes more difficult. On average, polar bears "now spend up to three weeks more on land each year compared to the early 1980s, when the ice was more stable and reliable for hunting," per the Glass Almanac. However, food on land — bird carcasses, berries, and other marine animals — does not provide the bears with enough nutrition to continue hunting and survive, leading to alarming rates of weight loss. Why is melting sea ice concerning? Rising global temperatures are melting sea ice rapidly, which contributes to rising sea levels. This can endanger coastal cities, putting them at risk of flooding or storm surges, and threatening the destruction of coastal infrastructure. Increased global temperatures are also causing more water to evaporate, making extreme weather conditions, like heavy rains, winds, and storms, more frequent and intense. New Mexico, a traditionally dry climate, has been experiencing heavy rainfall and flooding — as many states have recently. Do you worry about air pollution in your town? All the time Often Only sometimes Never Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. What's being done about rising sea levels? Slowing the rate of global temperature increase can help keep sea levels at a safer level, mitigating the incidence and risk of extreme weather events. It also prevents sea ice from disappearing, allowing polar bears to continue hunting for food as they've done for generations. On an individual level, you can effect change by educating yourself, family, and friends about critical climate issues and voting for climate-conscious leaders that put the health of the community and the planet at the forefront of their legislative efforts. In a similar vein, find local organizations doing good and important work, and volunteer your time, money, or effort to support your community and the larger planet's climate resiliency. Each effort toward a healthier, more sustainable planet helps preserve the health and natural beauty of the world, ensuring future generations may get to live and experience the planet as we once did. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Solve the daily Crossword
Washington Post
19 hours ago
- Washington Post
We've made sharks into monsters
Lindsay L. Graff is a shark researcher and PhD candidate in marine biology at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. There are few summer traditions more predictable than turning sharks into profit. Fifty years ago, on June 20, 1975, 'Jaws' established the template for the modern-day blockbuster, combining mass marketing and high-concept thrills that all but guarantee mega box-office returns. But the film's lasting power lies in how it transformed a relatively obscure marine predator into a cultural icon and villain that could be used for financial gain. Before 1975, sharks managed to lead inconspicuous existences that belied their ecological importance. Fear of sharks wasn't born with 'Jaws': Isolated incidents, such as the infamous 1916 attacks along the East Coast, had already stirred public alarm in coastal communities. It was easy to scale local anxiety into global panic. Transforming sharks into predatory monsters leverages the primal unease humans experience when we're reminded of our natural place within the food web. In a single summer, 'Jaws' distilled a subclass of hundreds of species, small and large, down to the singular, misleading moniker of 'man-eater.' After the summer of 1975, sharks became unforgettable — and extremely profitable. But half a century after 'Jaws,' the truth is clear: Humans are far deadlier to these animals than they are to us. Each year, we kill an estimated 100 million sharks, largely due to overfishing, where they are caught intentionally for finning or incidentally as bycatch. Sharks were the perfect monsters for an economy built on entertainment and fear — not facts. Their capability of causing traumatic harm to humans (47 people were bitten by sharks last year in unprovoked attacks) lent enough validity for the 'man-eating' label to stick, irrespective of the fact that the vast majority of shark species feed primarily on fish, squid, invertebrates and planktonic organisms. It was far easier to sell society on sharks' evil tendencies than it was to face the reality that you're statistically more likely to be killed by a grass-eating hippopotamus — or that there are more people bitten by squirrels in New York City each year than Americans injured by sharks. 'Squirrelnado' wouldn't have quite the same ring to it. The lack of research on and public understanding about sharks in the 1970s allowed them to become whatever Hollywood imagined. This fact can be heard in the remorse of 'Jaws' author Peter Benchley, who, after an encounter with a great white shark while diving in the Bahamas, penned an essay with his famous line: 'I couldn't write 'Jaws' today. The extensive new knowledge of sharks would make it impossible for me to create, in good conscience, a villain of the magnitude and malignity of the original.' Before science could dispel the myths, sharks had been cemented in the public's eye. The immense success of 'Jaws' sparked a wave of films, including sequels: 'Jaws 2' (1978), 'Jaws 3-D' (1983) and 'Jaws: The Revenge' (1987). Hollywood's interest exploded. Television networks followed suit. Discovery Channel aired the first Shark Week in July 1988, and it has since become a summer rite of passage. Shark Week leaned heavily into sensationalized storytelling of shark attacks and shark bite reenactments. It provided a space for viewers to face their growing galeophobia, however misguided, without leaving the comfort and safety of their living rooms. Today, Shark Week is the longest-running cable television programming event in history. As the scientific and public perception of sharks matured, driven by advances in marine science and public education, media channels adapted their content; sensationalized fearmongering was replaced with conservation-focused storytelling, and shark behavior was allowed to extend beyond the overused verbiage of 'lurking' and 'stalking.' Even as Hollywood maintained its fascination with the man-eater — not least of all in the series of six (six!) 'Sharknado' movies — National Geographic launched its own week of shark-focused TV in 2012, SharkFest, developing it into the multi-week TV event that it is today. SharkFest is marketed as a science-based, educational alternative to Discovery Channel's Shark Week, but the platform remained grounded in the same logic: that sharks are media assets designed to generate viewership. There remains an uneven balance between episodes of science and spectacle — each meant to appease an audience viewing these animals through a different lens. (Even the popular TV show 'Shark Tank,' which has nothing to do with these cartilaginous fishes, is meant to evoke in viewers the sense of business-focused, man-eating investors.) Recently, the commodification of sharks has reached digital platforms, such as Instagram and TikTok, where sharks fuel personal branding and ego. Platforms are flooded with influencers who disguise sharks as subjects of scientific curiosity and conservation, when in reality they are used as props to gain followers, views and personal clout. We are spammed with content from people recording themselves unsafely interacting with wild animals and sensationalizing shark encounters to feed a performative image of bravery or connection with nature. They are exploiting these animals like those before them did on our movie and TV screens, reducing 450 million years of evolution to a tool for engagement and sponsorships. Humans intentionally kill sharks for profit, selling their fins for shark fin soup or mounting them as trophies. Consequently, over one-third of shark and ray species are now threatened with global extinction. By contrast, between 2019 and 2023, there were just 64 unprovoked shark attacks, including six fatalities, per year on average. Most attacks occur when swimmers or surfers are mistaken for prey, such as seals. Sharks are important and worthy of conservation and research, and not because they generate profit. Without sharks, marine ecosystems can unravel, leading to population booms of prey species, degradation of habitats and a loss of biodiversity. Sharks matter — not for what they give us, but for what they are.
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists create ultra-repellent non-stick coating for safer cooking at home
Teflon and other PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) have long been prized for making cookware, packaging, and fabrics resistant to water and grease. But these 'forever chemicals' don't break down in nature and tend to accumulate in the human body, posing serious health and environmental risks. Now, researchers at the University of Toronto have created a promising alternative that delivers high performance with much lower risk. Their new coating repels water and oil as effectively as standard non-stick materials, but contains only trace amounts of the least harmful PFAS variant. Silicone base with PFAS twist The team used polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), commonly known as silicone, as the base for their new material. 'PDMS is often sold under the name silicone, and depending on how it's formulated, it can be very biocompatible — in fact it's often used in devices that are meant to be implanted into the body,' said Professor Kevin Golovin, who leads the Durable Repellent Engineered Advanced Materials (DREAM) Lab. However, PDMS on its own falls short of matching PFAS when it comes to repelling oil and grease. The breakthrough came when PhD student Samuel Au developed a method to enhance the material's performance through what the team calls nanoscale fletching. Nanoscale fletching for repellency 'Unlike typical silicone, we bond short chains of PDMS to a base material — you can think of them like bristles on a brush,' Au explained. To improve their oil-repelling power, the team added the shortest possible PFAS molecule, consisting of a single carbon atom bonded to three fluorine atoms, to the tips of those bristles. 'If you were able to shrink down to the nanometre scale, it would look a bit like the feathers that you see around the back end of an arrow, where it notches to the bow. That's called fletching, so this is nanoscale fletching.' When the researchers tested the coated fabric with oil droplets, the material achieved a grade of 6 on a standard repellency scale used by the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists. That's on par with many commercial PFAS-based coatings. Low risk, commercial potential 'While we did use a PFAS molecule in this process, it is the shortest possible one and therefore does not bioaccumulate,' said Golovin. 'What we've seen in the literature, and even in the regulations, is that it's the longest-chain PFAS that are getting banned first, with the shorter ones considered much less harmful.' 'Our hybrid material provides the same performance as what had been achieved with long-chain PFAS, but with greatly reduced risk.' The team hopes to collaborate with manufacturers to scale up the process and bring the product to market. Meanwhile, research continues. 'The holy grail of this field would be a substance that outperforms Teflon, but with no PFAS at all,' Golovin said. 'We're not quite there yet, but this is an important step in the right direction.' The study is published in the journal Nature Communications. Solve the daily Crossword
