Reptile Fight Club - RFC - Who gets to iNat a find?

Episode Date: October 17, 2025

Follow Justin Julander @Australian Addiction Reptiles-http://www.australianaddiction.comIGFollow Rob @ https://www.instagram.com/highplainsherp/Follow MPR Network @FB: https://www.facebook.com/MoreliaPythonRadioIG: https://www.instagram.com/mpr_network/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtrEaKcyN8KvC3pqaiYc0RQSwag store: https://teespring.com/stores/mprnetworkPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/moreliapythonradio

All right. Welcome, everybody, to another episode of Reptile Fight Club. It's Justin Joolander coming at you here with Rob Stone. How are you? I'm great. Excellent. Things are pretty good over here. as well. My brother sent me a camera, and it's a very nice camera.

It's a Canon RP, and I've been having a lot of fun with it. It takes some really nice photos, so I might have migrated out of the phoner group into the more professional camera group. There you go. Okay. Yeah. Been taking a few kind of trial shots, and I put up some of the bretles shots that I took on Instagram and Facebook and it turned out really well. So I don't know.

I mean, kind of in the daytime, you know, it's a little easier to get a decent shot and it was a little overcast. So good lighting that way. But yeah, they turned out. I was very happy with how they turned out, you know. So kind of fun to mess around with, excuse me, I got a little bit of a little bit under the weather today. So we might have to keep this somewhat short. But, yeah, figured we'd get another episode out. We've had some fun ones lately, so it's been nice to have some really cool guests on and talk about some fun topics for sure. I don't know. As far as snake stuff goes, I've about got all my inlands feeding, so they're all doing pretty well.

I got, I think, all but one to eat last this week. So that was nice. It's always a good sight to come in and just see a bunch of full bellies instead of hoppers running around or fuzzies or whatever. Yeah. And the antiregia are a little more reluctant, but they're still on a decent track. I had my first Pygmy Python take its meal on its own and take a pink mouse. So I'm encouraged by that. And hopefully I can get the others to follow suit soon.

Just keeping up with those guys I've kind of gone the hind leg route this year instead of tails So not fun to make mouse drumsticks But it's kind of necessary sometimes How about you? Yeah, all good, no changes on my end Yeah, just getting excited We have a trip coming up here

Short order Yeah, very short order Yeah trying to hammer through the final details on that, but that's exciting. So, yeah, yeah. Yeah, I'm excited to try out the new camera in the field, have you guys show me what to do. Jordan even offered to send me over a flash, so that'll be cool, you know, one of the external flashes. So I'll be able to try that out with it as well and try to learn how to hopefully he can make the trip and train me, you know, like.

Exactly right. Yeah. So, yeah, I'm really, really excited. A full, full frame, you know, full sensor or what is it, full frame type camera. So big sensor. And, yeah, it's been really fun. And then my brother was always trying to tell me to shoot in raw, you know. I was like, okay, whatever. And then I shot in raw and you can manipulate, you know, to get what you see, you know,

and get the exposure up and all sorts. of crazy things it's pretty amazing so yep thanks bro my uh my little brother jd he's uh he's a he's a nice guy he's he's got a lot more fun toys than i do so i i'm glad uh he's willing to let me borrow some of his older gear but he's got i think he's got the same camera that jordan has which is kind of top of the line yeah crazy ridiculous uh set up so it's kind of fun Very cool Yeah But I think I maybe mentioned it

But the asper egg that I got a little while back is still going strong And so yeah Hopefully I'll be able to add another species to the list this year And see how that goes Yeah But good good stuff over here That would be an awesome little baby to see Yeah

Yeah, for sure. I also got a broke down and finally got a morph market account. So I've been putting up some snakes, putting up some ads. And it makes it really easy when you can, you know, take a picture on your phone and put up an ad the same afternoon. You know, it makes it very, very slick. So I've been putting up some ads for the jungles. All the jungles are eating rats except for maybe two of them. So yeah, it's a pretty. pretty good deal. Putting up some antiregia lately. So, yeah. If you're in the market, check them out. Yeah, I've sold a few snakes this week. And yeah, it's pretty immediate response.

It definitely made it worthwhile to get the ad out. So, yeah, not bad. So, yeah. So that's always my least favorite part of the part of this is selling stuff. I'm kind of like, yeah, yeah. it's it's there you check with me but i need to do a little better than that i think so yeah um so i'll be putting up stuff kind of available stuff here and there and getting some more ads up but yeah uh looking forward to the trip oh jordan and i started on on our um presentation for the

um carpet fest out in texas in october so we're yeah we're we're We're going to be talking about all our Australia trips and the finds that we've had down there. So it should be around five-hour talk, I think. We'll see if we can make it short. But yeah. Tighten it up a little bit. Yeah, exactly. I just keep going through it and going, oh, I found these.

I'll put up a slide of those, you know. And, like, I mean, obviously we're going to focus on pythons and that kind of thing, but there's so many cool reptiles that we've found. You know, that we've found out there and doing a lot of miles. I think Jordan put up there he's gone like 30,000 kilometers, and I've done about 40,000 K. So, yeah, about what, what is that, like 23,000 miles or something for me? So, done a fair few.

Not too bad. Yeah. And Jordan's almost matched it, but he's only done maybe three trips. right just the massive he's a driver he's like yeah and he's spent you know more time on his trips I think so yeah which is saying

something it is how yours are relative to mine oh yeah yeah Jordan knows how to roll I think but yeah good time so I'm looking forward to that looking forward to meeting the folks out there seeing Reptalandia that's going to be really cool

so I'm definitely excited so yeah if you're thinking about going to Carpet Fest in October in Texas. Yeah, that's a good idea. I will look that up as we speak. So you don't run into your Southern California difficulties. I thought it was this weekend. Although I suppose out in rural central Texas,

it's probably less likely that there will be competing events on subsequent weekends or whatever. Right. I still, yeah, feel like kind of a. A bit of a fool for doing that, but what do you do? I would have looked quite the fool, an April fool, as it were. So the event itself is on October 19. Oh, that's 2024. Where's the 24?

I guess they have not updated their website. I suppose I'll have to go to Facebook. But yeah, I mean, I don't know. I think I'm really, really excited to hang out with Brett Bender, you know. Of course, Jordan, I'll be hanging out with him quite a bit out there. And then seeing like Brett Bender and some of the other Raleigh of folks that we've interacted with in the past. And then obviously, you know, seeing Ketzel and, uh, oh my gosh. Ari, yeah.

I wanted to say Rayu. but I guess she'll be there as well. And I would like to meet her and chat with her. I guess I met her at the California debacle mix up. So, yeah, it should be a good time. All right. Well, a little dead air with some typing in the background, you know. It's good times.

Yeah, things are going great. Yeah, exactly. October 25th, 2025 at Reptalandia Reptilegan. So they've got a pretty cool shirt too. So I'm excited to grab one of those as well. But yeah, good times. Very cool. So if you make it, come out and hang out with us.

All right. Well, are we ready to dive in? I think so. Yeah. Okay. I think, so Rob came up with this topic, and I think it's a good one to discuss, and we've had a few of these issues ourselves on trips and, you know, on several different trips. So I think it's... Well, I think, yeah, it's interesting. If you're not, right, we just talked to Jordan a couple episodes ago when people have heard this, but, you know, he used to go mostly by himself, right, with his dad. And then to himself, he kind of talked about that as his usual context. And then obviously there's no issue, right, save for being in a situation.

I don't think he's doing this, but, you know, where you come up upon a group that has already found an animal, road cruised, an animal or something like that. And we talked about the, did you find it if you were, you know, the chairman who came upon on the road, Dustin with a green rat and those sorts of situations, you know. We've already talked through that sort of as an idea. But absent that situation, if you're herping by yourself, well, there's no one else who could possibly be duplicatively posting that animal. And that's kind of the theme is, yeah, posting either on social media or on- Social media, INAT, HurtMapper, whatever the-HRPREPMapper. Sure.

And there are different kind of connotations or issues with each of those different things. I-NAT and HIPMapper being similar, but social media, yeah, brings up its own set of different issues. right so we can talk through that a little bit as well right right and i i think well i mean i guess let's flip a coin see what kind of see what stance will take yeah exactly so go ahead and call it i'll say tails it is tails you have won the coin toss would you like to be who cares just everybody post willy-nilly or should we have some order to this thing i think is that a good way to phrase it yeah i mean yeah that's based i had framed it you know who who in the group i guess that implies that i think there should be method in order to these things and as a consumer of these

data sets more so than you know for for reasons of my own um than a poster right i guess i would i would prefer to not have data sets and let's say data scientists in daily life i would prefer to not knowingly create bad data sets so yeah that would be my product election so i'll go with that okay okay sounds good i'll take the who gives a crap it doesn't matter anarchy chaos rains yeah yeah i was i mean there's some records on there that are like uh hurt group you know class or something where they all log the same animal and there's like five different pictures of of the same snake in a bag or something or you know in hand and you're like obviously this was a group and they are learning to use eye naturalist or something like that.

Well, even the Eastern Massasaga, right? Yeah. Given the context of that, my question became, I wonder how many times we're going to see this posted. Right, right. And the answer is at least two or three times. Okay. So that animal did get posted and posted by several people. Anybody from our group?

I don't know if I did or not. I don't think I did. but I can check. Yeah, I don't know for sure. It's definitely on there at least twice from people that aren't us, which is sort of the point, right? Especially, I think I'll go ahead and kick it off by saying, this is obviously most noticeable on things for which there are fewer records. Right, right. essentially the distortion that can come from the same animal not only same animal but the same

instance of finding a particular animal has a greater distortional effect the smaller the overall data set is so that if we're talking about something um you know like rough scale pythons where there's six records on i not i think um the The fact that one of, or two of those six, that really that seems to represent at most five distinct animals. Two of those appear to be the same animal taken from different angles on presumably the same day. It's seated in the same context within a rock ledge. That almost certainly is the same, at least two people in a group posting a picture of the same animal. It could be that it didn't move, and they're not related groups, and that actually was either within the same day or the next day.

It just hadn't moved, and they both happened to find it or whatever. That seems unlikely, given sort of all the context and constraints, but it's possible. And so, yeah, I guess that was the thing that really brought it back to the front of my mind is looking at that saying, okay, you know, if I'm trying to look at seasonality, range extents, are there cluster, obviously those are inherently obscured based on their conservation status. So I know, you know, there's been some question around INAT, what the obscure, we've talked about that, I think even, what sort of the meets and bounds boundary box and all these different things. But the idea is really okay, are we getting distortional effects in small data sets because people are overposting a singular animal and singular find of a singular animal? Right. And I think, you know, to some extent, especially with the rare stuff, you can pretty easily see, you know, okay, that's a duplicate record. That's the same animal as this record and found on the same day or, you know, on the same month or whatever it is. And if they're obscured, it might even give away a little bit more where it was found, too, because. Right. We've talked about that in terms of where the dots are and are not and all that. Exactly. Yeah. And I mean, also for some of those, you probably already.

already know where the where to find them you know for example the bretles python i was looking or even even all the animals we found on our trip i was online at today kind of thinking about this topic and and noticed that both jordan and nick had posted a lot of the stuff uh repeated you know the same animals or the same same observations but different um you know nicks were just kind of like quick phone shots that were not not the most clear and jordan's were like his professional photography. And now Nick, Nick also does really great photography, but he posted his phone shots for the INAT records, which makes it easier. You know, it's already got the geo, spatial location type stuff in there and does definitely make it easier. And there are a couple things that they

hadn't seen. So I added like a parenti, you know, and things like that that they didn't see and that we could add to it. But I know that for an observation we made down of a Great Basin Rattlesnake, both, I think I might have posted it. And then Chris and Aspen, I think, separately posted it or something like, you know, there were three different observations and somebody was on there like, hey, these are all the same thing, you know, get your act together kind of thing. So I do think there is kind of an argument for that.

But at the same time, you can obviously see this is the same animal posted on the same day. So it's not a big deal. We, I think, so a couple things that grew out of that. And as I was saying that, I realized they're really sort of the same question applied in two different contexts would be to say, well, what's your utilization of the data, right? As a casual user of the data where I'm trying to kind of parse through and identify seasonality, broad. trends, those sorts of things. It is easy to look at that leutosis record and see, okay, that pretty clearly is the same animal. We're having the same time frame. I've sorted

them by date of observation and I can see the clustering there so it's more obvious. Theoretically, right, I-Naturalist is a tool for random citizens to promote science by providing scientific records that have been integrated into scientific papers. Right. And if the sort of researchers that are utilizing that data are relying upon a certain level of quality

within that data, then there is an argument that by not putting in clean data, we're knowingly sort of skewing the data sets that are being utilized in publications that rely upon that. Maybe some of those researchers are cognizant of the challenges with this data set, right, that we might have this as an issue in there cleaning up their data before just relying on it. I would hope so. But it's one thing, if we're talking about something where there's, you know, a half dozen to a hundred records or something like that, if we're talking, the paper that jumps to mind, right, was looking at the regionality and proportionality of Bell's phase versus typical phase lace monitors in Australia and, you know, sort of the gene flow that was extrapolated from that data.

That was, I believe, thousands of records. And at some point, that's probably unrealistic to anticipate them to be able to catch with 100% certainty and clarity that there's no duplication within that data set. And again, maybe it's within the margin of error. Maybe it becomes the alternative answer on such a large dataset that it won't have that much of an impact. I just throw it out there. The alternative thing that's raised by, well, what sort of what is the intentionality or what's the point is, It does seem like some people utilize their INAT observations as sort of maintaining their life list. Right.

And so to that extent, if you're counting it towards your life list of having seen it, I can understand the argument that everyone, if they're doing that, should be able to post that. That becomes a little hairier when you have folks a natural divider in terms of who gets to post it as, well, do you even post stuff on INAT or HurtMapper at this point in time? Right. Um, well, what if five years, you don't today when we saw it, but then five years down the track, you decide I'm going to do that so I can monitor my life list and you're going through your collection of photos and things. And then five years after, you found it, maybe five years after you posted it, someone in the same group posted again. And better yet, they do it from a slightly different location and you get some, uh, you know, keyboard warrior who comes on and says, not only is this the same animal that clearly the same animal that was posted here five years. previously you have it a quarter mile down the road neither of your neither of these records should be trusted now yeah and this did happen i got in this argument and that's part of the reason i don't post that i'm at any more yeah yeah is that explicit case when owen you know it was in our 2019 trip and it was that gould eye uh on the road over to uh cacadu and um you know i post i was posting things in 2019 and put that record up there and um we got into I got into a, you know, sort of taxonomic argument with a European enthusiast around what that is,

which really isn't even the point of INAT and sort of in any context. That's its own, I have my own issues with that. But, oh, and then three or four years later, posted his photo of the same animal and put it either with the, you know, the record, the location based on his phone or whatever it was. And as I say, it was, I don't know, 1,000 feet, 1,500 feet further down the road or whatever it was. And I don't know if that was the record from his phone, if that was from his memory, whatever that reflected. But yeah, literally, that was the response. Neither of these records should be trusted since this is clearly the same animal and they don't even agree where they found it. Yeah, right.

And I mean, I think, too, like I was going through some of the records and came across one that was. like, you know, out of range, it looked like a similar species, but it was within the range of a different species. So I put a note on there. I said, I don't think those occur here. And, you know, lo and behold, the record's gone from that area. So people can be responsive. They can remove a record or change it or move. And he even indicated in that record that he was unsure, you know, was like he's going back in time and logging some of these observations. And he's like, I think it, you know, I think it was year, but I'm not sure that kind of thing. So, you know, those kind of things definitely can play into it.

And you can, to some extent, go and corrected and change things. And I think it's helpful, too, that in some ways that they update, you know, based on taxonomic changes and things like that. That can be a whole other ball of wax as well. Right. Yeah, my principal grievance with that is how it crosses out. when there's a taxonomic change it's like oh everyone on this list was wrong about what this was right it's just my own yeah just bad optics reader yeah exactly i can imagine an uglier thing to do

that just doesn't seem so unnecessary for my perspective but for sure and i mean it kind of hits a nerve with something like the stimson eye to children i chain and now i i i don't even want to log any stems and i because i don't want them to be yeah as children i but uh maybe that that's okay for some but for me i'm kind of drawn the line there but um so you know i i do think the responsiveness of of putting i net records out there can can be a benefit of that you know where you can change things and remove duplicate records yeah not every as long as board warrior who exactly get into it with you yeah and i think too like you said i i looked up the the lace monitor and there's 12,000 observations.

So, you know, I'm sure some of those are duplicated and some, but it's probably, like you said, within the margin of error. And I think the, you know, the spread of the data is probably pretty reliable and robust and with that many observations. And most of them are probably just a single observation. So you could, you know, I'm sure somebody's looked into that, you know, what kind of, what is the standard error rate per X number of, right? records, right? And I totally agree that there is, there needs to be ownership by the

utilizer of the data, whatever their purpose is to say, to validate it, right? To look through it and actually put eyes on it and not just rely upon sort of the synthesis that's been provided to them. I agree. Yeah. So, you know, in that way, you can kind of mitigate some of those things and it becomes less critical. But, you know, I guess moving forward in people's minds like um i guess how would you suggest uh we we take that on that's the hard part right yeah yeah i do because that that is the issue certainly the path of least resistance is to just sort of let everyone do what they're going to do right and um by not posting stuff myself anymore not utilizing it to represent my life list not doing any of those things then i'm not a an additional

person, right, who's sort of interacting with that issue. And with my own ethic around what would count as a life or fine for me, like when we're herping as a group, I would certainly, I certainly at a minimum understand the problem or the dynamic of saying, like, if it was sort of the collector mindset of he who finds and identifies it or whatever, in any case of mutual fine, maybe you fight to the death i don't know um but like you know oh okay well justin you know certainly where i posting stuff the um the she i well that's yours because you found it right even though i'm trying it would still count on my life list and things based on the context i i guess maybe that's part of why i don't

use i not for that purpose because i would want you to have that record because justifiably so it's your lifer as well um but there's no way that to really resolve that without someone then not sort of having a conflict either amongst their ethic of saying, hey, I count that as my lifer, it's yours as well. The only way is if we're both utilizing that format is to distort the data. That's the only viable solution that I see. What I did do, and maybe is I did highlight in all my records, okay, this was presenting it. I don't think anyone else within the group, like in 2019 with the Owen Pelly Python,

I don't think anyone else was utilizing or at least posting on INAT at that time. So I didn't have like handles or tags that I could put in the comment. But I did say found with Keith, Eric, and Owen, you know, full name, you know, to give that credit, recognize that group effort, you know, all those things. So that was sort of the way I. it approached it at that time again and it wasn't an issue then it retroactively becomes this issue where it's like oh okay this is um now owen's posting the photos you know and stuff which is great and i didn't didn't don't want to stop him from doing that actually one humorous one that i was

looking i was looking at florida pines the other night as a question of seasonality for other things sure and uh one of one of the records that popped up there was a very beautiful florida pine snake And I said, wow, that's a really beautiful one. And sure enough, it was, I clicked into it and it was Phil's post of the one that we had found two years previously. Right. He was like, you know, in May of this year, Phil posted it up. You know, so that what I don't think anyone else in the group posts on there. So that's probably the first record for that one.

But it is always interesting to see, see that context of like, oh, I remember. I know that snake. And sure enough, sure if I do. Yeah. I had a similar thing with some of the Arizona observations that Owen posted up. I was looking through and I'm like, oh, that one, oh, that's, yeah, that photo looks familiar, you know. Oh, because I have the same kind of photo, maybe from a slightly different angle or, yeah. So I think that's, I agree that, you know, it might be good to let the person who actually found it post it, you know.

And we kind of did that with, at least on social media, we said, hey, you know, Jordan found the bretles. Let's let him post that first to social media or whatever. You know, we kind of had like a gentleman's agreement type thing in the, you know, in the field. And, you know, for other things like something like a, you know, inland marvelled velvet gecko that we were finding, you know, 20 of or something. Sure. Or a Stimson's Python out there. You know, you're seeing multiples like, okay, you know, pick one. That's such a big deal. Share it. Yeah. It's not not the biggest deal. And you probably don't, oh, I found, I spotted this one first. right you know it's like you know where where you have one bretles like okay now we we all know who found that one you know everyone remembers the context yeah yeah and i think you know maybe herper

etiquette would be let the person who found the more rare thing you know post that up or or at least have first crack at it or whatever you know sure i mean the other so this i guess the sort of contradictory point or the point just to be clear about right is to the extent that you are that, or someone is utilizing it to represent their life list, then like, I guess the clearest answer, and again, it doesn't totally solve the problem if you have, you, people are using the data that aren't sort of cognizant of this as a potential risk, you know, to the data integrity, would be to say you could, you could actually put in your comment, this is duplicative of, I think all those records do have a numerical string that identifies them uniquely

within the Inaturalist website. You can say, this is duplicative of this. I'm posting it to represent its place on my life list, you know, found with, you know, tagging that person or whatever. And I think that's probably the most ethical thing you could do if you did still want to post it for yourself for your own sort of list tracking purposes. I think that's probably what you could do. you could actually highlight in the comment, yeah, I know this is a duplicate, a duplicate record.

And we've got it together and, you know, this is that context. And I guess when you do that, the imperative is slightly there to make sure that you don't provide either additional or different information than was provided on that other record because it could either be misleading or it could be giving away a different level of information, right? Some of these things, we're mostly talking about stuff that has either were obscuring the records or have a conservation status where binaturalists automatically obscures them. But in that context, right, if you, Justin, you find the Shai, you post it up, I then post a duplicative record, don't highlight that they're the same animal. And you had it obscured and I put a pinpoint. That's not good form on my part either. Mm-hmm. Well, and to the same part, you know, the same point, like, just because you have a pinpoint of a shay eye doesn't necessarily mean you're going to find a shay eye there. You know, so I think some species are less of a concern with that. And so, you know, I'm a little bit okay with, you know, people posting the exact locality of a certain animal that is not predictably easy to find. Like, you know, like versus a den site where obviously, you know, there's, you know, they're going to come back here year after year and you're going to see animals at the right time

of year, a lot of them in that spot. It's best to keep those places, you know, secret or, you know, not post them on INAT or whatever. Not as explicitly post them anyway. Exactly. Yeah, yeah. And so, you know, but some places are really well known and people go there for that purpose to spot stuff. I think a lot of these places are. And we're kind of diluting ourselves when we think, oh, we have some, you know, the special insider knowledge. And I think, too, like animals are a little more durable than we think just because we come and photograph them and, you know, maybe move them into a position, opposed position or something, they're going to not abandon that habitat for the most part. I mean, there's probably examples where some might, you know, you never know.

And two, if some are more locally abundant and very sparse and throughout their range, but certain areas are very high densities. If you get an unscrupulous individual in there and they start collecting them, then, you know. I could do damage. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It could be a bad scenario. But for the most part, I think most stuff is pretty, you know, taking, for example, like the, you know, we've already talked about some of these things, you know, like you're going to see a lot more records of snakes on roads because people are road cruising because it's easier to find stuff and you're going to find a lot more that way.

And so, you know, you'll look at records or you're only limited to the roads, like in West Texas, where unless you have access to private property, you're restricted to roads and road cuts for herping. And so, and even then, you're not supposed to technically road cruise for reptiles. So, you know, you're kind of breaking the law. If you stop for a snake in the road and move it off the road, you're supposed to let it crawl on its own volition, I believe, according to the strict interpretation of the law. So, you know, in those cases, you know, we've already kind of identified the limitations of I naturalists in that context. You know, you're just going to be restricted to those things on the road. So giving a pinpoint locality is probably not that critical because they have thousands of acres on either side of the road that they can move into and have appropriate habitat. And the word just having a snapshot of a small area where they can be found.

So, you know, I think with some of those things, it's a little less critical or less. I think that's true. I mostly highlighted there in that context of saying, I knowingly duplicatively posting the same record that you have and sort of contradicting the status and designation you had given it. Whether that's just you obscure everything, you know, as a matter of course, possibly that's. that's what it is or whatever but um i don't know i could just see that getting a little a little tense right right and i think for the most part i guess to some extent like you know looking at records of australian reptiles out in the middle of nowhere sure the people that are report like for example one of the spots we hit is a big like scientific study area so you get a lot of

classes or research groups that are out there trying to document things. And so you can see the pit traps in the background. It's like, okay, that's why they're finding, you know, Brevacotta, you know, the pygmy, what are they called? The short tail monitors and the Eremius, the desert, rusty desert monitors. They've got like five or six records because they're pitfall trapping. And that's the easiest way to find those things. Otherwise, Why is they can be a big challenge because they just scurry under a spin-effects bush, and that's, you get a passing glimpse. Or it's people doing the infrastructure projects, right? I mean, so many of the Australian Herper slash Herper Bros, right?

That's what they're doing. They're out there. Their job is to, yeah, pull reptiles out of, I mean, you see some of those guys, yeah, posting on Instagram or social media, these amazing reptiles. A massive trench. In their big trench, yeah. They're rescuing them out of there. letting them go on their way. Or like, for example, that group that does all the tours, but they were over in, like,

the Middle East and found some desert monitors, the Grisius, and in an abandoned well. And they have a bunch of abandoned wells that they go to and, you know, free, you know, spiny tail lizards and rusty, or not rusty, but the desert monitors. Yeah, the Grisysh. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. And he hadn't seen the guy, the tour guide or whatever, hadn't seen one in the wild until he pulled one out of a well, you know, like, so there's those kind of things, secret spots of maybe those should be known. Maybe that should be an area that people are checking frequently. Exactly. That could be a very good thing if you're posting those pinpoint. Yeah, exactly. So, because you're not going to be there that often, but maybe other people might use your pinpoint and say, oh, there's a well here, you know, like we're going to go there and check it while we're here.

Then, you could also run into like, oh, somebody gets caught in the well. They can't get out or, you know, they're all alone. And then they're found in the well, you know, and rescued from the well. You got, I guess you've got to be careful that way, too. I don't know if you could take any legal action of, hey, they posted this sighting and I went there to find it. And I'm going to sue them now because that probably would only happen in the U.S. but right yeah yeah well and that even raises sort of the the kind of a fundamental question of this right is even relative to my own approach of you know saying oh i'm utilizing this data um but i'm not posting stuff is my under participation um you know what's the utility of that relative to over participation right the critique here is saying oh we're distorting the data by you know putting in the duplicative records what about me having hundreds, thousands of records that I don't post, right?

What is the utility of not posting those things? So I think that's fair too, right? That's a fair critique of saying, sure, we build in this margin of error versus all the stuff that I'm not posting. Right. Especially if you're looking, like, I don't know, I guess I could use my birding as an example. Like, I, when I started birding, I was really, like, dutiful about posting numbers. Like, oh, I saw, you know, 500 Canadian.

Canadian, Canada geese flying, or in a field or something. So I'm like, oh, about, you know, I'm kind of doing a rough count and trying to get an idea and posting that, you know, to Ebert or whatever. And I don't do that anymore. Like I may not even post it unless it's a lifer for me or something. You know, so, you know, and I think our interests may change and we might provide a lot of good data for a small area that's local to us, but then, you know, for the most part, we might just like, I already entered the Western Diamondback. I don't need to

record all of the ones that I found in, you know, this or that area. But I do think those records are important. So, yeah, I think you're right that a lot of times we're underrepresenting the data by not posting. I know Chris, I think it was Chris that was posting every side botched lizard that he saw in, you know, St. George area where that's the most common lizard scene down there same with like joey muggleston he was posting a lot of common things and i think those are very helpful sometimes too to look at changes in population density but if you only do it one or two years and then you stop right do you was there a change of density exactly yeah it reminds me of uh of what uh Zach was saying about uh hellbenders you know the the methods

changed or we said oh don't look for them this way and so the crayfish guys were finding them but the hellbender people weren't and so they were alarmists oh they're disappearing well no it's because you change tactics is do we have a similar situation with the INAT records where like oh no we're not having enough these things are observed less frequently this year was it just because people didn't log them like they were intensively logging them years prior so I think we have Of course, there needs to be some kind of careful evaluation of these data sets because they are, it can be kind of willingly at a whim anyway. And so, you know, you've got to be aware of that. I'm sure they are, but, you know, it's one of the issues. And to that point, as I, you know, gave that number around the Ruffy records that are on there, that was the research verified records because those, that, that population,

is incredibly distorted and I guess speaking to the question of like what what are other people utilizing INAT for half the records for ruffies in australia from perth and adelaide pet shops and our private collections right what what what what who who put up this record into what end not only is that obviously kept event like it's in this beautiful terrarium with you know custom background and all this like why are you posting this like do you're posting this like dogs or things like that, you know. Okay, yeah, it's a live version of that animal. And as far as if you're not, like, I don't know, that was, that was surprising to me.

That is kind of crazy. I did see a Brettel's record outside of like Brisbane or something like that. Obviously, somebody's pet that had escaped, but somebody found it in a backyard and posted on INAT, you know. So I think those things, too, can be useful to try. track, you know, maybe the start of an invasive species or, you know, not to say that Breddles is going to be an invasive species there, but like if, if, uh, we could track, you know, Burmese pythons from, from, you know, sightings over time. And I think they've used things for that. Yeah. So, um, we could kind of do a little slew thing to figure out when, you know, and what

numbers and where they radiated from and things like that. Right. I did see a talk once on Burmese pythons that kind of talked about that and based on the data they they thought that maybe even a single animal was released in the 70s in the everglades because they kind of saw radiation outward from the everglades you know and somebody just had some maybe had some big pissed off grab with female that was aggressive and defensive and you know and they just said ah the heck with this and threw it out in the swamp because you didn't you know people didn't know better in the 70s or whatever, you know, we were actively introducing things into waterways or whatever. So I think, you know, they can maybe be forgiven for that.

Who would have thought, you know, a Myanmar animal would take... Yeah, it would be so resilient within that space. Yeah, exactly. So it's hard to predict how useful these things would be. But, you know, you see environments change, even year to year. year, you might go back to the same area and some invasive plant has taken root and, you know, competed out all the native fauna or flora in the area. And, you know, we see a lot of that. And who knows how that's going to impact certain populations and, you know, their mobility through

the environment. And yeah, it can be a big problem. Right. And in that sort of the alternative use of that same thing that you highlight there, I think of at the Massasaga location where they're trying to regrow some of that prairie type habitat, there were those stands where they were actively encouraging people to take a photo at this angle from this particular location and submit it to their website or whatever it was, so that they could have a chronological record in photographs over time to track progression of the flora that they were trying to popular that area with. you know exactly what you're talking about it saying like and standardizing it by putting it lay your phone in this little slot here take that picture send that to us and that's that's the useful you know more standardized

version that can give us this information right right and i and i think that's probably a doable thing for small areas but man you get some of these like i look at you know cheat grass in the southwest and it's just ridiculous and there's some others that i was reading about recently and maybe that's something we might be better at too is like logging, you know, everything. Yeah, exactly right. Just like, what's this plant? What's this plant? You know, like I don't know, just adding to not only just a reptile record, but maybe all plants, animals, trees, you know, bugs, all sorts of things just to help things down the road.

But, you know, it's, I guess overall. You're probably going to get a wide swath of, you know, people just learning to use it, just taking pictures of everything and logging everything they can, which it's kind of fun, you know, but the same time you get just, it becomes a chore and you're like, okay, I don't think I want to do this anymore. You know, I did my time, but, you know, that could skew things as well. So I don't know. I think with some crowdsource thing, I think what do we look at? there was like how many observations of of things living things in you know north america are there it's right it's kind of kind of nuts amazing yeah yeah there's even with duplication in that and no knowing duplication in that record it's still amazing yeah

yeah and it's it's also kind of fun to look at places that are undersampled you know where you can zoom in and and there's no records within like a hundred miles of North Korea, Libya, you know, like that. Yeah. Or even Australia, you know, where there's no roads, there's no records. You know, how crazy would it be to go in some of these areas and just have like a ton of records that you made, you know, doing a hike, you know, from the road as far as you could get in or something. Or, you know, is it really a barren wasteland or is there just as much life out there as there are? Obviously, there's going to be plants and bugs and all sorts of stuff out there, too. so yeah and it's sort of a similar idea you see the pictures from space of the earth and the

impetus in uh you know myself as always i'd like to go to the places that the lights are not right you see the dark way you know yeah that's actually kind of that has an appeal to it yeah but but getting those places you'd need like a dirt bike or a or a camel or you know a horse or something um it'd be hard to wind up in the well yeah right yeah yeah Or broken down somewhere out, yeah, in the middle of nowhere, like, oh, crap, you'd have to be a mechanic and carry some spare parts and things like that. But that'd be kind of, I mean, I guess there's still adventure out there, you know, something to getting to some of these areas, especially if you're like a local person, you know, if you live in a town, you know, that's close to one of these dead zones or whatever, or unrecorded zones, it might be cool to go make a few observations out there. yeah actually i'm looking at one just like in the center of or kind of the north north central western australia and there's one record that's out in the middle of nowhere that's not

near any other records it's all by itself i need to see what that is it's a tenophoress of some sort a little and now the natural next step is clicking on that user idea and seeing what else would you find things? Yeah, why this? Stephen G. Hamilton, observe this thing out in the middle of nowhere. And we could probably get an ID on it, but maybe it's a new species. Who knows? Yeah.

And then this isn't the only database. You know, there's a lot of things that you could probably add to INAT. Different regions have different. Yeah, exactly. And like you'll look on other databases that are making. maybe more research intensive. I don't know how many research. Maybe these days researchers are using INAP,

but back in the day, they were just publishing their data in a journal or, or, you know, another database held by a museum or something like that. So, you know, it's kind of tricky. Yeah, absolutely.

And, you know, even with hidden within the argument or as a, uh, an underminer to the position, my position, right, of saying, oh, well,

we have duplication in the record. obviously any of the historical context that were relying upon sort of paper IDs in a formal in jar with the spec that aren't being critically evaluated and was just put into a catalog of holdings that said oh we have these records associated with it those could be entire misidentifications right we know that that's very common or the taxonomy has changed radically so that that's you know there's since been derivation you know splitting out of that lumping or splitting or all those things. So I suppose that, you know, sort of fits within the margin of error. Right.

I was saying, like, yeah, all of this has its, you know, pros and cons, right? Or benefits and detractions. So I think that's totally fair. Yeah. I was, just incidentally, I was in a museum or it was a visitor center up in, like, Xmouth area in the Cape Range National Park. And I'm pretty sure that's where it was. But, yeah, their visitor center, they had a preserve, you know, some preserve snake specimens. And they had a Rosen snake, one of the pseudas species, mislabeled as a Stimson's Python. Yeah. And I'm like, that's not a Stimpsons python.

I told them in 2013 when we went through there. I went through there with my wife. And I said, yeah, that's not a Stimpsons by then. It's a Rosen snake. And they, yeah, and we went back the next year and it was still mislabeled. So they didn't listen to the Yank who they figured didn't know their Australian reptiles as well as they did or something. So I'm like, come on, guys. You still got a mislabel.

What's going on? Yeah, exactly. Here I showed, I think I even showed them pictures. Like, here's the Stimson. Here's the rose that they do look very similar. But look at the head, look at, you know, and they still. No, no, that's a Stimson's Python. I'm like, come on.

Yeah. What do you do? so one other sort of aspect of this or you know within the range of this conversation that we alluded to a little bit earlier was the idea of sharing to social media you know and the question of not i think there right it's more um hopefully people are talking about it in the context of their trip and not saying like oh look at all the things that i found you know failing to mention it in the context of being with with the great group which is really the point of the thing anyway that's true But, you know, the thing that jumps to mind is saying, like, okay, maybe there's a greater tolerance. We're not then use it. I don't know what the utility of social media is, really, but it's certainly not, you know, being pulled as a data set in the same way as a citizen science resource, be it in Aet or HurtMapper or whatever else. But I do think we then get into issues. I know we've seen this.

And I don't think it's ever really been a problem or come to a head or even. you know maybe even been discussed but it there are different people have different feelings on the idea of sharing photos during the course of the trip right and then is it sort of like the quickest on the draw even if it's not the best photo and it you know it's not processed and whatever and that sort of becomes the public narrative or public story to the extent there is one you know right right even if it isn't the best photo it wasn't the person who found it all those different things yeah that's uh i i hadn't really thought of that you know like um logging who was there i i didn't you know think about that aspect of it you know that's that's something new to my brain i guess

i'm more of a selfish person than you just thinking of myself but you know that that could definitely kind of pare down the duplicate records or make it easy to see that it is a duplicate record from something else if people did that more commonly you could make those ties a lot easier maybe exclude datasets right right yeah makes it a little bit more of a team effort rather than yeah or if you just had one person designated to who wanted to log them yeah post all the animals we saw you know and and for example like if you saw something that nobody else saw or got a glimpse of it and people weren't there to see it then yeah you could log that obviously that fits into the box right at the prerentee, you and Aspen, you know, but.

And I don't, I don't think Aspen logged it, but, you know, I didn't check too closely either, you know. I kind of did, but yeah, kind of not. There's, there are quite a few perenni records out there, too. So, yeah, it's possible that Aspen could have logged it. And I didn't, you know, cite him as being there to witness the animal. But, yeah. But again, that's, that even falls into the box of. okay well the extra time to do that and then you know obviously the the sin of omission even then

would be the greater the greater challenge of saying oh if you if there were five people on the trip and you only list four you know like yeah it's even worse that you shouldn't have done it even in the first place you know right that's true um one other thing that i noticed uh in my combing of semi net records this afternoon was uh um if there were really good photos of, it was particularly with Breddells pythons. Dave Barker had made comments on several posts saying, is this a captive animal? That's really nice lighting and it's really nice pose.

You know, is this a captive animal? And no, this is wild. You know, I found it out in the, you know, Western West Max or whatever. So, but, you know, and I think that's reasonable to maybe question some of these things. Like you said, if it's in a case, like in enclosure like is this was this taken in a pet store you probably should make that clear you know like i i know i know i'm on the uh nothing really matters side of things but i think that does matter you

don't want to log in you know captive animals in your i nat records or else we get a got a bunch of philics it's super strange right when you pull it up yeah there you know that that's the actual fight. Yeah, I don't know. It's interesting for sure. Yeah. And you do, you do get some kind of strong-willed, not to say Dave Barker's, you know, I'm sure he's strong-willed, but like in this regard, like I think that's perfectly apt, double check and make sure. I mean, even though they were within the range, like, I don't know who's bringing their captive animal out to the natural range to take pictures of it in Habitat. But I mean, that could be something that happens, you know, especially if you captured it and took it into captivity and, you know, oh, I want to get it pictured in its natural environment or something. And, oh, I'm going to just post this up on INAT. You know, that's probably not the best ethical thing to, unless you did capture it and kind of put it, you know, put the picture of the pin. Exactly. Yeah. And sometimes you look at a record and you're like, I don't see this habitat where this pin is. You know, it's like, did they really take it here? Or where is this

taken, you know? And I think, too, like, like people are like maybe not maybe took it with their film camera don't have the exact GPS coordinates remember like oh it was around here somewhere I was doing that the other day with pygmy pythons where I was like where because I went through my photos and I have each like day or a couple days within its own subfolder and so I was like when did I see pygmy pythons I thought I saw him over here so I was looking in the folder and I did see you know one in that section as well But the majority of them were over in this section, you know, and that was like, oh, really? I saw them here, you know.

And then there were a couple like daylight shots between pygmy. And I'm like, I don't remember seeing them on two nights in a row. Like, you know, it was kind of like, but this is also in 2013, which is, you know, for 10 years ago. And so, you know, it makes it a little foggy that way too. And I had taken some notes and written down like GPS coordinates of where we found these things. but I can't find those notes. I just misplaced them or there's somewhere in a pile in my den or something. So that's kind of the challenge too.

As long as I think you're giving transparency around that context. Right, right. You know, this is, you know, you even see those records where it's like, oh, this is from taken from photo of a slide from the 80s, this is, you know, approximate location. you know within whatever you know yeah exactly so yeah i think there's a lot of a lot of things that you can kind of um either nitpig and you know people get on there and you're kind of maybe aggressive like your encounter with the the monitor fellow you know sometimes that kind of stuff is just like oh dude take a chill pill you know like is it really matter if i put in the subspecies or put in you know like there are a few like that where i'm like very very

terrifying records. Like, yeah, that is a Varanus Tristus. But, like, is it Tristus Tristus? Or is that Tristus, or is that Tristus? I'm like, I don't even think they know. There's probably like several species within Varanus Tristus. That whole thing is much more complicated. Yeah, exactly. So to even nitpick it right now before that, you know, the more thorough studies are done where, hey, it looks like a Tristis, it's a Tristis, mate, you know, like that. I think those days are over. like, you know, but I guess we use the current taxonomy, but to get down to us, I don't think there's a good clarification for what makes an Orientalis or a Tristus, you know, it's like, if it has a black head, it's a Tristus. If it doesn't, you know, so that was kind of maybe, I don't know, maybe that's the American version of our thought process in the pet trade animals, you know, so I don't know, what do you do? But I think our knowledge base grows. And, you know, I think those kind of changes might be tricky, and I'm glad they do it on a kind of an I-NAT level

rather than letting people go through and, hey, this is wrong now. Exidemic energy. Exactly. So just saying, hey, all these things in this area are now this, you know, let INAT deal with it. Well, I might not be persuaded by whatever evidence they found persuasive to make the change. At least it is standardized, and I have to recognize it. Yeah. Acknowledge and appreciate that.

Yeah, exactly. Although the range of children, I is now much. I'll never get off that horse. Quit rattling the cage. Never. Oh, goodness. Well, any other topics on this or any other points that we haven't made? No, I think that's mostly it.

I think the only, you know, clarifier additional point, right, is the same stuff can apply in the context of social media. And I just think we want to, as long as everyone's, right, it's sort of like anything, as long as everyone's coming to it from a sort of collaborative. Exactly right. Collaborative perspective. Acknowledging sort of the capacity of everyone to have narrative and authorship within their own experience and all those things.

I think as long as that's the perspective we're bringing in and that's the folks that we're going on trips with that, you know, I think it's all good. Yeah. And two, I mean, you might have somebody in your group that may take a year or two to get to the pictures or not. Yeah. Exactly. Somebody may be on this podcast. Yeah. You know, that's the whole thing, right? Part of it is, well, I'm not going to be, I don't want that responsibility to be doing that. Right. Right. And I will go back to one of the points you made of, you know, people. posting while you're traveling that's kind of landed us in hot water in Australia when you know one of the group was posting pictures and and and I I said hey you want to wait until we're back home to do this you know that might get us in trouble or people might make the wrong conclusions and he's like it's not a big deal it doesn't matter and then we got searched at the airport and you know questioned and all that

kind of stuff and it was most likely because somebody saw the posts and said hey these guys are these guys are on a collection trip through australia you know because they they keep the same things in the u.s and it's like well do the math we've never been here and we have the species already like come on we're not collecting more so no no you know just too clever exactly so i mean i definitely welcome i mean not welcome but it's like go ahead and search me i don't have anything i don't i'm not bringing anything home it's it's it's far cheaper to buy them in the u.s than to you know for for the most part and then to try to smuggle anything at risk my I came here for the experience of finding this thing not to subjugate it and put it in a box

yeah yeah so I think that's another important factor you know don't get yourself into trouble by posting stuff because you're excited about it and that's fine and Australian seemed to have no problem you know for the most part of posting stuff and I don't know it's interesting Yeah. Or you take things for granted in your own backyard, you know, like I kind of like the idea of not posting stuff so people don't know where I'm going and finding things. Well, exactly right. Well, that mine was sort of a secure, like I just don't like particularly. I know this is out of vogue, you know, given all the apps that now track everyone and all these things. But it's sort of like, it just seems I've always been a little reticent about. the idea of particularly publicly sharing sort of having people and i haven't done it but to have people within the group sort of giving a a blow-by-blow narrative of where we are in a given point it's like i just it makes me uncomfortable i don't like that so that's sort of a

detractor from my perspective even beyond sort of what you mentioned in terms of hey maybe we'll get hassled about this or whatever it's just like no i i prefer things to be you know oh that when I'm we're talking in real time now but you know people are hearing this two months later or whatever a month later whatever it is like yeah it's okay it's not everything has to be you know now and if if there are people I know we actually with the own Pelley I think that was part of the approach that we had taken was okay everyone can privately share it with like one person you know one rep now person or whatever that means five people will know about this you know and other than that we're going to wait until we get back or whatever yeah right and aligning on who was telling whom so that it was like okay you know kind of something but yeah yeah yeah all right well let it be known rob does not like his assassination coordinates out there on the public if you're herping with rob don't give him away yeah ideally not definitely something to think about you know and talk about with your friends I guess that's the fun of the herb trip is to kind of plenty of time to talk.

Enjoy each other's company, plenty of time to talk. Yeah, while you're out searching and just make sure you're not scaring away the herps by talking too loud. It looks like. Exactly, exactly. It does look like that unidentified comb-bearing dragon was a military dragon. It looks like to me. So I may add that to... To the sighting before the night is done.

Fun stuff. I do enjoy Eye Naturalist. It's a fun, you know, tool to potentially use if you're, but, you know, they don't, they don't capture everything and everybody's not posting everything. You know, you know they're in an area. You've seen them in the area, but there's no records in that area. And maybe you like it that way. Maybe you don't. Maybe you change it.

You know, I guess that's up to you. So, I don't know. I guess think about the overall good of the animal, you know, that's probably the best guiding light, you know, would my reporting of this animal in danger and jeopardize, you know, the animal or the population or does it really matter? Or might it lead to protection of that area? Yeah, exactly, exactly. Yep. So lots of things to consider. If everything could just be simple, you know, let's just. We tend not to operate in those topics. Right. They're probably not very interesting.

That's true. All right. Well, yeah, good, good stuff. I was thinking this would be a short one, but here we are over an hour. Maybe not as long as some of the ones we've had lately, but. Still pretty good. Yeah. Something there for sure.

Yeah. For sure. All right. Well, I don't know. We haven't thrown out our kind of places we post stuff. You want to give your information out? Sure. So my principal place is at High Plains Herp on Instagram. I do have a website that I haven't updated in a while. It's just Herp Photos at this point. And then I think maybe I got the Rhino Care sheet up on there as well. But yeah, I need to put some more time and effort into it. I might as well. I'm paying for the site and hosting and all that. So I guess I should invest more time in that money that's going out there and hopefully is, either of interest or as a resource.

So I'll try and do that. That's highplanesherp.com. Should go to the same place as rhinorats.com. Yeah, that's basically it for me. How about you? Yeah, Australian Addiction.com is my website. And again, it hasn't been updated very readily. I still am working on some trip reports for our October trip.

And, of course, diving in with the narrative is a lot more time-consuming and tedious than just throwing up. Yeah, I agree. I do enjoy kind of the play-by-play as you're going through the pictures and hearing the stories with it. That's half the fun. Maybe now you just link to the podcast. You don't even have to. There you go. Yeah. Just put the pictures and the link to the podcast. They can fill it in from there. But yeah, hopefully I'll get some of those up. But I also need to link my available page to my morph market stuff now. makes it a little less image heavy on the, yeah, on the, on the storage capacity that I have for the website. So, yeah, and then Instagram, J.G. Joolander, mostly herp pictures, you know, herping stuff, rather than captive stuff, but I'll throw in an occasional captive animal in there, too. And then Facebook, you know, Justin Jolander or Australian addiction reptiles.

again, I don't update those as much as I should other than my personal page gets updated from the Instagram. So, yeah, kind of killing two birds with one stone. Yeah, good stuff. Awesome. All right. Well, any can't miss reptile content

that you've listened to or seen recently? I haven't listened to a fair bit. I just listened to the, so Calubrid Corruption podcast. I really like, really like what he has going. And now they're all excited because a similar time frame to our upcoming trip. They're having their Calubrid Fest. So Zach and Clint are putting that on over in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

And they just were on the show with Joe talking through that and all. And I'm excited for him. You know, I'm excited about what we're doing. I, you know, it fits in the same box of Herp Expo versus being, you know, out in the field doing stuff. So I know, no reggarts, as they say, but, you know, their thing will be cool, too. Yeah, for sure. Well, I've been a little bit lazy in my HRP media consumption. So I've just been listening to random podcasts, mostly like funny things or things that can brighten the mood in a,

in a poor-up-ending situation we've got going on. So not a lot of HIRP stuff to talk about. But, you know, I have listened to a few things. I always enjoy listening to Chris Applin and his monitor podcast on the Trap Talk Network. And then hopefully the, I don't know, I thought I heard that the, the, the, what's, oh, God, why do I start talking before I have the related but our

buddies over at the Animals at Home Network Roy and Phil I thought they were going to be recording on track yeah but I haven't seen much from them

they're one of my yeah I really enjoy those as well project herpet culture yeah project herpulture hopefully they'll get some more stuff I did listen to a few episodes of the Herpetological highlights recently, and they're always entertaining and fun of the list.

Great guys, yeah. Yeah, cool. All right, well, thanks to Eric and Owen. Hopefully, I know Eric's had a little bit of health challenges, so maybe the shows aren't coming out as quickly as they have. We're getting quite the backlog, which is good. Yeah, yeah, it means less pressure on us to record as frequently, I suppose. But, yeah, hopefully, I'm just excited to listen to some of those again.

I want to be here. I think so when Benz comes out, I'm actually, I'm going to be excited for that to, for people to hear it. You know, it's really great to record that, you know, and they're, I feel that same way about plenty of them. But that, I think we did a lot of really cool conversation there. So I'm excited when that comes out, when we start hearing from people and we're going to be like, yeah, that was six weeks ago, but I love it. You know, yeah, yeah, yeah, same with Jordan's episode on photography. I just, well, that's just going to, I need to hear that again. If people are like me, they're going to be overwhelmed and just feel like it.

Okay. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Cool. Well, thanks again, Eric and Owen, and we appreciate all the work you put into this. And feel better, Mr. Podfather, and we'll catch you next time for Ripped Off Fight Club.