The rescue pie that tilted mammals past the birds

Dark donor-report-style 3-D exploded pie titled “Where your rescue dollars go”, tilted and thickly extruded so the gold Mammals wedge pulled to the front fills the whole foreground and reads as well over half the animals, while the teal Birds wedge recedes to a thin crescent at the back and slivers of green Reptiles and Amphibians sit at the top; a badge reads “Fur first — mammals are the heart of everything we do” and a kicker adds “Most of who you save has four legs and a heartbeat”, with no percentages shown anywhere — Showing the misleading chart

The identical counts as a flat top-down donut with nothing but the camera changed: Birds are the largest wedge at 51.9% (30,182), Mammals second at 43.7% (25,447), with Reptiles 4.2% (2,421) and Amphibians 0.1% (75) at the top and 58,185 animals admitted in the centre; a note explains birds led by eight points all along and the 3-D deck only looked otherwise because the smaller mammal slice sat nearest the viewer — Showing the misleading chart

Be the first to star this exhibit

Tilt a donor-report pie into 3-D and pull the mammal wedge to the front, and mammals loom as the biggest group of animals a wildlife rescue saves. Lay the identical counts flat and birds were the plurality all along — 51.9% to 43.7%.

Hanson et al., “Species, causes, and outcomes of wildlife rehabilitation in New York State,” PLOS ONE (2021); NY State DEC rehabilitator logs, 2012–2014, 2021Added July 12, 2026

01The claim

Mammals are most of what this wildlife rescue saves — the biggest slice of the caseload by a mile, and the animals your donation is really for.

02The trick

Every animal on the chart is real: 58,185 wildlife-rehabilitation cases logged to New York State over 2012–2014, of which 43.7% were mammals and 51.9% were birds — so birds are the larger group. The picture says the opposite, because the pie is tilted into 3-D and the mammal wedge is pulled to the front, nearest the viewer, where perspective inflates whatever sits closest. A slice at the front gets a tall, glossy side wall of pure decorative depth and reads as well over half the circle, while an identical-or-bigger slice at the back shows only a thin crescent of its top face and looks like a garnish. Nothing in the data is altered — no truncated axis, no dropped category — the third dimension does all the lying, and it lies hardest on the slice it seats closest to the camera. Drop the labels, as a good deck does, and there is nothing left to argue with: your eye reads the ink, and the ink says fur wins. (This exhibit is our own demonstration in the house style of a nonprofit’s donor slide, drawn from the published rehabilitation figures rather than from any real rescue’s report.)

03The fix

Delete the third dimension — the fix the trick has no answer to, because depth on a pie encodes nothing. Drawn as a flat circle seen from straight above, the same four numbers with nothing moved but the camera, birds are plainly the largest wedge at 51.9% and mammals second at 43.7% — an eight-point gap the tilt had reversed. The tell for gratuitous 3-D is exactly this: the visually biggest slice is not the numerically biggest, and the slice nearest the viewer always seems to win. Any pie with a horizon, a shadow and a thick rim is spending its ink on perspective, and a tilted pie can’t honestly be read at all, since its front slices are drawn larger than its back slices by construction. If the parts really do sum to a whole, lay the pie flat — or better, reach for bars, which never make you judge an angle in perspective. (For the record, the raw counts were birds 30,182, mammals 25,447, reptiles 2,421, amphibians 75, plus 60 unspecified.)