Drone Buck Studies vs. Collared Deer Research - Which Data Holds Up and Helps Hunters & Which Doesn't. | Series: Deer by the Data; IQ-10

Hey, Adam Lewis here, and in this episode of the DRCU podcast, we're going to talk about

a controversial topic, drones and deer hunting.

Specifically, getting data with drone deer research and studies that are out there now

is that valid and good data to help you make good hunting decisions or is it not?

And we're going to compare it to the old Trident Trude Collard Buck studies.

We're going to look at those both, which is better, which is going to give you better

data and better science to help make smart hunting decisions.

And should you get a drone to help you collect data about your herd, scout a specific box

and make better hunting decisions, or is that just a big legal trap?

We're going to talk about it all in this episode.

Welcome to DRCU.

Here to help you hunt smarter, elevate your approach, and consistently tag exceptional

white tail.

Whether you're just starting out or a long time hunter targeting mature bucks, this is

your edge.

We bring you proven tactics, expert insights, and unfiltered conversations with high level

hunters who just get it done.

Guiding you through it all is veteran hunter and strategist Adam Lewis, helping you spot

what others miss, fine tune your focus, and unlock your full hunting potential.

So let's raise your deer IQ.

Here's your host, Adam Lewis.

Okay, so drones are being talked about a lot now.

They're being used in a lot of different ways.

Some of them you might like.

Some of them you might not.

There's a lot of different opinions on this.

I'm going to try to honestly just look at some of these things, and we're going to start

by really looking at the studies.

We're about high IQ hunting here, smart hunting.

So what things can we get out of these studies to help us make better hunting decisions?

Some of it now, guys are saying, hey, these drones are really giving us different information,

better information.

And some people don't like the use of drones, and we have the collar buck studies that

have been around a long time that give a lot of data too.

So which of those is better?

We're going to look at that.

We're going to break it down.

We're going to look at the pros and cons of each, and really see, at least from the best

I could do my perspective of what these actually give us, what these actually tell us, ones

I would lean on, and ones I wouldn't, and why, and we'll discuss all those things.

Now first, I just want to say, I've been kind of sick lately.

That's why I haven't been getting a lot of stuff out.

So hopefully I'll be able to get back into it here.

I'm starting to turn the corner.

But if you like this podcast, I just want to say this.

If you like this podcast, if you follow it, it is very appreciated and very helpful.

It might not be a big deal to you, but if you subscribe, like and follow, depending

on your listening to audio version, follow it there.

And if you're listening on YouTube or watching on YouTube, subscribe there.

That really helps us grow the channel, and that helps us get better guests, better content

out, more content, all those things.

It really helps us reach more people.

And then another thing, if you like it, and like an episode, share that with a friend.

Again, that grassroots stuff really helps and is really appreciated.

So I tried to be honest in objectives I could to break down what I thought the pros and

cons of both these types of studies are.

And we've been seeing it a lot lately.

It's been real popular on YouTube with people tracking deer and just showing that, but also

all these studies, right?

Supposed studies, scientific, trying to at least spin them in that direction.

But are they that?

Are they really scientific?

Are they really giving us what we think or some people think or not?

Let's just dive into that and be real honest about it as to the pros and cons what we can

and can't get out of these.

And I did write article on this, a short blog, I'm going to go in a little more detail

here, but you can read that on the website as well.

The blog about college book studies and the drone studies and drone research.

Let's start with the collared studies though, those have been around a lot longer.

It was in the 1960s, early 1960s, when they started doing these, and there's been a lot

of these, and they're usually done.

I think they've actually most all been done through universities, and we'll talk about

that.

Why that I think is important.

These have been done for a long time, gathering information that way.

And to the point now, the collars are obviously much better, they're GPS, right?

So they're telling pretty precisely where these deer are, but let's look at the pros

first of these collared book studies.

First of all, if you look at these, you can read them, a lot of them are posted online

for you, and that's transparency.

I think that's a big thing.

You see about the data, the finding, you see a big report, if you want to read through

it all, some of them are pretty long, right?

And scientific, but they have summaries, they have things like that that you can kind

of parse through as well.

But these are done by universities that publish their findings, but most of these are fairly

large populations, I'd say large, between 40 and 70 bucks, of various ages.

So they're tagging and aging them when they put the collars on, so they know that information.

And they're collecting data many times for several years on these deer.

Several years, 24, seven, they're getting coordinates back, sometimes every hour, they can change

the settings on them, and sometimes down to every 15 minutes, right?

In these cases, they get millions of data points, and it's nonstop.

All the time, for years, that's a lot of data that they're collecting.

That is a pro, because in science, the more data you have, the better results you can get,

and it weeds out things that are outliers, right?

Things that just don't fit with the norm, it helps you really weed those out and get a more

accurate reading of what's going on.

It's kind of like a census or something, or a poll for voting.

The more population you have in that, the more accurate it's going to be, right?

So they're able to do that, and it's nonstop, 24, seven.

That is a big pro for figuring out buck patterns, what these bucks are doing.

When they do that, there's not a stop in it, right?

So they're led by teams of trained researchers.

These are people that put their lives into this.

They've been weeded out.

They again work at a university, right?

So they have multiple degrees, and they've been really honed in the sciences.

They are put through the ringer in many cases, and this allows for removal of as much bias

as possible.

Humans, yeah.

I'll have some sort of bias, right?

They're trained in observations and removing those, right?

There's accountability that comes with that.

They're overseen by each other in these teams and other professionals.

That brings a lot of accountability and ensuring valid measuring methods and data collection.

Again, these are trained scientists at universities that have doctorates.

Some of them are working on master's degrees when they do these studies, and they're overseen

by these other professionals.

That's really important.

Teams of accountability and trained professionals.

They get another pro, quantitative data sets, a lot of numbers, like I was talking about,

to mathematically analyze for statistical significance.

Quantitative, that's quantities, that's numbers, that's real data.

The other type would be qualitative, which would just be observations like the deer made

a scrape.

The deer licked itself.

That's qualitative.

That's not a number, unless you start counting those, right?

100 times in two hours, whatever it might be, right?

But they have quantitative data sets that they can start analyzing mathematically.

That's really important, and again, they're getting those nonstop.

Political significance is important in being able to crunch numbers, having the ability

to do that, and do it correctly, do it well, to pull out the data, because a lot of the

times the problem is when you're trying to analyze some sort of hypothesis, is you can't

factor out the variables.

Hunters, we think we see everything and we know what's going on, but it's very hard for

100 to do this, right?

All the variables, whether the wind is the rod or not, there's so many things in the

wild that are playing into what we see.

But many times, if you have the right people involved and know what they're doing with

the data, and you have all this large amounts of quantitative data, you can weed that out,

you can weed out the variables, which is super important.

Also, peer review, there are other peers in other universities and scientists that are

looking over these studies and the results and their conclusions and really being analytical

about it and scrutinizing these.

That's important, and it weeds out things that aren't true, and you have a lot of eyeballs

on it and the science community to further verify results.

Another pro, and like I said, I'm going to bring this up again.

This type of setup, many times allows for removal of variables other than what is the focus.

A good example of this that I had a recent podcast with Dr. Bronson Strickland at MSU

Dear Lab there, he just retired, but was there study of the moons of fact on buck movement?

They were able to weed out all of the factors mathematically with their team.

They were only looking at the moons of fact on buck movement, and that is a huge pro here

because again, us hunters, if we're just observing, we aren't doing that.

There's a lot of variables that play.

We think we're seeing it for this reason or that reason, but we don't know for sure, right?

What variable caused that outcome?

What variable caused that effect?

Well, they mathematically could weed it out.

That's a pro of these collar buck studies and who is actually doing them?

Another pro of collar buck studies that I see is it allows for big picture view of how

bucks operate, how they move, how they behave.

You can use with large data sets, you can look at statistically averages and things like

that to really show you the big picture.

You can apply that, obviously to that deer herd that they did the study on, but probably

to other deer herds too, around the country and where you hunt.

It's not always going to be the same, but when you look at the big picture like that about

buck behavior, it helps you get the overall big picture very well.

Another pro that isn't real obvious, I think, is that when you have this institution, this

educational institution like University of Georgia or Pennsylvania or Mississippi State

or a lot of these other ones that have done these different studies, you don't have anybody

tied to a certain outcome.

You don't have a lot of bias there because they're not trying to sell you something.

They're just giving this data out, right?

They just did a study.

Here's what we found.

They don't have any products or services, they're trying to push you toward with their results

and findings to try to get you to buy something.

They're pretty unbiased about it.

You might not agree with what they found, but it's pretty straightforward.

It's pretty objective.

Their process is pretty clean.

It's been, you know, scrutinized by a lot of people and they got no stake in the game

other than, hey, here's what we found, right?

They're not trying to sell you something.

I think that's a definite pro.

Now let's look at some cons that I saw with college book studies.

There's a lot less of them than the pros, at least from what I could think of.

A con is it doesn't allow you to see nuanced behavior of bucks.

You see a ping about where the buck is.

You have to decipher something about his behavior from that.

Was he bedded?

Was he feeding?

You have to figure that out.

It's a little tougher.

You can't actually see it.

If a box in a location, you don't know and it doesn't show if he's standing up, sitting

down, if he's, you know, moving a little ways and re-betting, you don't see him interacting

with other deer, you don't see if he made a scrape there or not or a rub, you're not

seeing those little nuances things, right?

So that'd be a con of that method.

And it doesn't focus on individual buck behavior.

So finding out those little details, like I said, is I'd say, yeah, some people would

say it's a con.

And or outlier buck behavior.

So it's more looking at the averages.

This is what bucks tend to do, but they do report on bucks that do crazy things like some

of these studies where they looked at, again, MSU, they looked at types of buck personalities,

mobile and sedentary.

And they talked about how some bucks, this one went like 15 to 17 miles to a new range,

we have the Mississippi River, you know, for part of the year and then it came back.

So there are things that they parse out when they look at specific bucks, they can do

that, but they don't get super nuanced with it because they just can't sometimes with

those colors.

So that's some pros and cons there.

So overall, they're best suited for finding general buck behavior.

They can track what certain bucks are doing, like I said, with the personality and they

figured out some bucks are sedentary.

They have a home range and some are mobile, which they're moving back and forth between

different ones throughout the year, they can do that, but they're not seeing little

things like interactions between deer that you would see with a camera.

Okay, so that's some of the pros and cons I thought of that really stood out to me for

color buck studies and why I might use that information from a lot of those and there's

a lot of them out there to try to make me a better hunter, a more intelligent hunter,

to utilize some of that information and apply it to deer around where I hunt, which would

be kind of the goal, right?

How do I apply this to where I hunt to understand deer better, to make better decisions, to have

better hunting results, right?

Now we've got these drone studies, which these are more done right now by individuals.

But they can go out and buy a drone, you just have to have some money, right?

There's various levels, some just have video, some have infrared, so they can see heat

signatures, right?

People are using them for a lot of different things, but one of them is studying and observing

deer and seeing what that means.

Are these as viable or better than like a color buck study for a person, again, trying

to figure out buck patterns, what bucks do, how they behave, right?

So let's look at at least from what I could tell what I think the pros and cons are.

Okay, the first pro that I saw was that it allows for viewing nuanced behavior of deer.

You're seeing what they're actually doing, and again, you can't do that with the color

buck study.

You see if they made a scrape, if they bedded, got up, moved five yards, bedded again,

that might not show on the color buck study.

You're seeing how they interact with other deer.

If another deer came up, what happened there, what they did, how they reacted with that?

You're seeing those things.

I think that's a very positive potential thing.

The next question would be, what do you do with that?

Some of this nuanced behavior, you have to ask, well, what does that really add to my

knowledge?

What will it really do to help me hunt that deer?

I don't know, but it is going to show that if you can get on them.

It allows for viewing individual bucks reactions to other deer, to hunters, to a lot of

different things in the environment.

Again, it helps you see that if they're visible.

Now, that's kind of a short list.

Now, let's get to the cons here about what I see, at least right now, with these drone

studies that are out there, the people are posting, the people are really getting wrapped

up in because they're kind of interesting.

That's the thing.

It's kind of interesting to see these behaviors because maybe as a hunter, you've never seen

this stuff.

I've seen quite a bit from what I've hunted over the years, but as a hunter, you don't

see deer that often.

You're not observing deer all the time when you're hunting.

It takes a lot of years, decades and decades, to really build up all those sightings.

I've seen, I think, the Reeboks breed those in my life.

Some people have been hunting longer than me and never seen that.

We don't see this stuff, right?

We don't see all these behaviors that much, so these studies really are eye opening to

those things.

I think that is really on display with these drone studies because it's, well, it's a video,

right?

We're actually seeing stuff and it's kind of cool, right?

The question is, beyond that coolness, what is it actually adding to my knowledge and

what I know and how I'm going to make decisions to hunt a buck, right?

And we'll look at, well, a specific buck versus general knowledge, right?

Let's get into the cons, cons of drone studies as far as I see it.

First it's usually going to be a smaller population sample.

You can't just, unless you have a huge team and a bunch of drones, it's really hard to

follow a bunch of different bucks around.

It's going to be a small one or two or a handful of bucks, really sporadic and random observations.

I'd say that's a con.

You're not able to follow that many of them to see any patterns that emerge.

It's more viewing individual bucks.

You can't observe or track them 24-7, like people are sleeping.

They're not on the woods having a drone track a deer 24-7.

The data has many holes in it.

It's very, very patchy.

That is definitely a con when trying to put patterns together about deer and make conclusions

about them, make decisions about them.

You just don't have enough data and it's very sporadic and patchy.

Another thing that's tough is finding the same deer.

You have to refine these deer all the time.

In a collared buck study, they dart the thing.

They put the collar on it and, unless there's some malfunction, it's on there for a couple

of years, continuously sending data.

With drones, you have to refine them every time someone goes out with the drone.

They got to refine this deer if they even can.

Are they even finding the same deer?

You have to be really careful with all the foliage and things in the early fall.

Are you even finding the same deer and how long can you stay on them before the battery

dies?

You're just not getting that much data and sometimes you might be getting bad data if

you are tracking a different deer or something.

That is definitely a con in this case, finding deer, maybe finding wrong deer and not being

able to stay on them that long.

That's on the data collection side.

Now let's talk about the quality of the data.

The first thing I think of when I see this is there's no method to ensure competence

of the researcher or really the correctness of the information or forthrightness, honestly,

of the information they're presenting.

If it's just one person with a drone, how do you trust that data?

How do you trust that the methods were correct?

How do you trust that they actually saw what they said they saw?

Okay, we see some video of it, but they're not going to show you hundreds of hours of

video.

It's a lot of trust involved there with a person that has gone through no process to show

that they're a scientist or their methods are going to be good.

That's a big red flag to me.

There's no method to ensure that.

There's no team of professionals either to verify this, to be accountable to, to look

at the methods, look at the data, look at the conclusions drawn, to be critical of those,

to help steer those in a better direction or the right direction or to eliminate error

or bias in interpreting and presenting data.

There's none of that there.

There's no quality control of sorts in this process with one person, whether they're trying

to do it great or not, we don't know the competence of that person and we don't know if there's

bias or error in there when it's just one person.

There's a high likelihood there's going to be.

With this type of observation, it's more qualitative.

You might get some quantitative stuff like numbers of times you saw this or that that you

could pull out of it, but there's much less in that collar book study I referenced that

we talked about with the moon question, the moon data and how it affected books.

That was a couple years in a million data points.

You're not going to get that with a drone study.

You're getting very patchy data points, mostly qualitative, like just stuff you're seeing

is not data is a number that's able to be crunched or not that much of it at all.

That's much less reliable when it comes to looking at patterns and evidence that you see.

There's minimal qualitative data to crunch to draw conclusions from which tends toward

a higher, just interpretation and potential bias.

The last thing to think about, as I said, with a university where these people are just

pretty much objective observers and they're just reporting that, people that are doing

the drone studies, you have to wonder and some of them are doing this, they're trying

to sell a related service.

When you're doing that automatically, there's bias involved there.

It's hard for there not to be, it's hard to remove that.

You have to think about that when you're getting all this from these drone book studies or

the research or whatever you want to call that.

That being said, I'd say drone specifically research studies, whatever you want to call

it, are much more individualized to certain books or just a couple books, a handful of

books.

It's good for finding specific book behavior maybe and observing that, but not for overall,

big picture.

This is how books behave and react and do certain things, not much at all.

I will mention, obviously, one of the things is for recovering deer, but we're talking about

studies here, right?

It's much more individual thing to find certain deer if you can get on them and if you can

make those observations.

This episode is brought to you by 2A Display.

Their friends here at the podcast, they make some great products, I'll show you a couple

of them here.

If you're watching, these are for knife and gun display and these work great.

These ones haven't been magnets.

You can mount them on a wall, you can stick them with a magnet on your safe inside or outside

it to create more space for holding your weapons securely and so they're readily available.

They work great, they're a good value and really they allow you to hold and store your

guns, knives, whether it be shotguns, handguns, rifles, ARs, where you need them securely,

safely, so you can quickly get access to them.

So check them out, 2A Display, with code IQ, you get 10% off.

Check them out, there's link below.

And this episode is also brought to you by our very own ADRIQ Test 360.

Quite a few people have taken this and all the feedback has been incredible, it's been

great.

A lot of people don't like test for some reason, but guys, if you really want to improve

as a hunter, it's not going to be some gadget.

You need to know about you, what are your blind spots, what are the things really holding

you back that you don't even know about.

That is what is going to make you improve tremendously and quickly is finding those things

out.

And it does that in a very objective way and everybody that's taking it has given rave

reviews about what it's told them and how it's helped them.

The DRQ Test 360.

And even better than that, you can get one where I do a console with you.

So you will get a report that tells you the findings, your unique kind of profile.

But with the console, you get 45 minutes with me and we go through every single bit,

it's very helpful.

So check that out, that's the DRQ Test 360.

Okay, so those are my list of pros and cons for research and studying done with a drone

versus collar box studies.

I'm sure you have thoughts and ideas, please put them below, but that's how I see it.

That's what I see.

From looking at those lists, those lists is honestly an objective that I could.

It was very obvious to me that if I as a hunter, and I would say this to you, if you as

a hunter really want to get some data, some things that can help you make big decisions

to capitalize on is the collar box studies.

Those are just much more reliable data.

And you can use that to try to make better hunting decisions.

Now the drones do have a place.

And I think as we go forward here, some of these universities, if they start adding drones

into those collar box studies, I think that could be a very good added thing.

I don't think they're needed though.

I think right now they can get pretty much everything they want out of those collar box

studies that is valuable.

I guess augmented version, the just added value would be a drone to kind of see what they're

doing at a certain times, but I don't think it's really necessary.

And so I think those are what you want to look at.

If you're looking at trends to learn about deer and make smart decisions, but let's talk

about drones a little bit more.

The last thing I kind of said there was, it's about specific behavior.

They help you see specific bug behavior.

And this is where this is good obviously for recovery.

I think that's an obvious one that's going on now.

But where this gets people in trouble and I recently talked to a guy, and let's talk

about a little bit of the legality here of drones, recently talked to a guy who was interested

in the land plan and we're talking about doing that.

And he said he wanted to get a drone to study the deer on his property because he'd been

using some trail cameras, some cell cameras, and it was really helpful.

And I had to tell him that I did not advise him to do that because in the state he was

in, it is illegal to scout deer with drones.

And the language in these states is super important for you guys to know.

What does your state actually allow?

What does the language of the law actually say?

Because observing deer, if you're just observing deer, that could be scouting, right?

What is the difference between observing deer and collecting information and using that

to scout?

And I would venture to guess that even if you're researching deer with a drone, if you

hunt in that area at any point in time, it is almost impossible to separate that knowledge

and you using that in the field.

You essentially scout it and use that information to help you gain advantage on that deer.

And some state agencies don't look too highly on that.

And they will interpret the law sometimes, I guess, to their benefit, right?

The wording can be very weird about some of those things.

So the benefit of drones and finding information about deer actually can become a very big

disadvantage because it can get in trouble.

Again, how do you research deer and not gain that information and prove if the DNR found

this out that you didn't use that to help aid in taking a deer?

If you found out that information that didn't indeed potentially help aid you take that

deer, it's going to be hard to prove that it didn't.

Again, some states have specific wording that would allow you to do that, allow scouting.

But many states do not.

And I have a list of this in the blog.

I'll just say a few, but you've got to look in your own state, but that person I was

talking about earlier, it was not legal in that state to recover deer or scout deer

with a drone.

So that would have been put them in a very bad situation if the DNR found out.

My home state of Michigan is illegal to scout with a drone illegal to recover with a drone,

right?

And drones are considered part of the take of wildlife.

So any information you get, they consider aiding in the taking of wildlife and that's illegal.

You need to understand that language with constant and these are as far as I understand

it.

Again, do your own research.

This is not legal advice, but I'm just going off of what I researched and see Wisconsin

is illegal to scout, but it's allowed for recovery Illinois, illegal across the board,

Indiana, illegal to scout allowed to recover with a drone, Minnesota, illegal to scout.

It's patchy on the recovery part Ohio, that's where a lot of the drone recovery will get

Mike on the podcast probably next week to talk about some of the stuff he's been doing,

in Ohio to recover deer and some of the legal things he's been getting into just in that,

which it is legal to recover deer in Ohio, but it's illegal to scout and keeping those

separate is important.

And if again, you're researching or whatever on your property that looks like scouting is

scouting illegal in your state, look at a couple cases here where again, that you're leaving

it up to the DNR and a prosecutor to interpret.

That's not a good place to leave it Missouri, illegal to scout, I think there's a 24 hour

cool off period if you view a deer scout a deer with it that you can't hunt that area

for 24 hours, but it's allowed for recovery in Iowa is illegal across the board.

Again, check your state for that, but DNR agencies, let's look at a couple cases here.

I'm really drawing a line on this, there's one case recently in Indiana you probably heard

about where guys actually track this deer, neighbors, people in the area, turn them in and

they're getting busted because they actually took the deer with the use and aid of a drone

by tracking it, by using bait, which is illegal, several different things that were illegal,

but the drone itself, when they confiscated that, had all the data in it, right, had pictures,

it had GPS data points, so even if you are observing deer for a scientific study and

then you go and hunt and shoot that deer, how are you going to show, how are you going

to show that you didn't use that, that that wasn't scouting, oh, that was just my research.

Again, you're in some really legal, great area to be really careful of.

In Pennsylvania, there was a sting case with Joshua Wingenroth, I'm saying that right,

for drone deer recovery, supposedly he called the DNR to check if it was okay and they said

yes, so he started doing it and then they did a sting on him where a DNR officer posed

as an eight, as a hunter that wanted to recover deer, he went out, launched his drone, started

looking for it and then they slapped him with a fine in this sting, took it to court, it

was only thrown out because the DNR withheld information. It was the phone call that he called

in to check and see if it was okay to do and so they threw out the case, but it still has

not been decided because it didn't really come to a resolve, they just threw it out. So

in Pennsylvania, it's still up in the air and a lot of states are like that. We're still

seeing the law kind of get worked out and the law is always behind, like or not, the

law is always slow, it's behind the technology, it's behind the innovation, so they're trying

to catch up and figure out what to do with this. It's a similar with cell cams, right?

States are still trying to figure out what to do with trail cams and specifically cell

cams. Iowa should we allow them on public or not, allow them at all, Kansas, outlaw them on public,

but it's okay on private, you know, they're still trying to figure all that out. So it's kind

of a sticky area that remains to be seen. So as you look at this stuff and I'll kind of wrap it

up here, those are some pros and cons. If you're a hunter that likes to take data and science

and you want to look to some of these studies, I would heavily rely on the car buck studies to

see what you can glean out of those. We've broken down a lot of those on this podcast. I've written

about a lot of them before, interviewed those scientists, that's solid information. All you have to

do is figure out, well, does this supply exactly where to where I hunt, right? The drone studies

might show, they might seem cool, they might show some individual buck movements and things

that are kind of neat to see, but do they actually add anything new to what we know about deer?

From what I've seen, they don't add a lot new. We already knew a lot of this stuff that is showing

and it's not really going to help me. All right, and that wraps up our series on deer by the data

and looking at that. We're going to start two new series next at the same time. We're going to

kind of bounce back and forth. The first will be high-tech hunting and we're going to continue

talking about drones with Mike Yoder. He's with deer drone recovery in Ohio. He has seen a ton of

stuff and we're going to look at a couple things. We're going to look at what it really takes,

keys to recovering that deer after you hit it. He's done a ton of deer drone recoveries. He sees

what happens with certain shots and he's going to tell you exactly what he's seen. It's very eye-opening

to make sure you recover that deer after the poor hit or even just a decent hit. We have a hard

time tracking it. We'll also get into the legality. All the stuff he's been in legally working with

drones, fighting certain laws, what it really means for you and drone operators. And just I guess

the future of drones in hunting, you won't want to miss that episode in that series. At the same

time, we're going to get into land prep details for success. It's spring. People are making improvements

to the land and land management, food plodding, all these things. We're going to dive into some

details for success there. You won't want to miss any of that and I'll see you next time.