 I don't have a demonstration, unfortunately, because it is the last presentation of the day and it has economics in it. So that always makes people happy, but I do talk fast. So I'm going to try to stay on time, 40 slides in approximately 20 minutes. So I talk fast, so let's hang on, and we'll see how we do. Like Kip said, I'm with the National Solar Dynamics Lab in Auburn. We're on campus. If you don't know a lot about our lab, I'm part of the conservation systems research group. There's four of us on that team. Dr. Balkum is one of those. He's an agronomist. I'm an economist. We have Andrew Price, who's a plant physiologist, and Ted Kornicki, who's an engineer. We work as an interdisciplinary team to look at conservation systems, specifically in Alabama, but hopefully applicable to the whole Southeast. So why are we talking about conservation systems? Who wants their field to look like this? Anybody? Anybody want to have anybody seen this kind of field? Yeah. We don't particularly want our fields to look like this, but it can happen, right? Especially when you have no cover in the winter, maybe. I think there's some crops growing, but I think that's residue out there. In the winter, when we have heavy rainfall, like everybody's talked about, sometimes you can get runoff. And if you don't have cover out there, you may end up with something that looks like this, and we don't want that, because what's going to happen over time? Your productivity is going to go where? Down. And so we don't want that. We want to maintain our productivity, so we want to keep our soil where it belongs, and that's in the field. David set me up perfectly to go into my presentation, which is great, although I consider myself a conservation salesperson, because I have to tell you how much it's going to cost you to do a conservation and what the benefits are going to be to that, and hopefully it comes out in the positive. There are four main questions we're going to talk about. What is a conservation system? Are conservation systems being used in Alabama? And luckily, we have a data source now that can help us answer that question. I adopt a conservation system, and what does our research say at the lab? I'm going to give you two examples. There are a lot more, but that means I would talk for the whole day, and I know you don't want to listen to me for the whole day. What is a conservation system? For us, when we do our research, we assume that a conservation system is conservation tillage that we're going to maintain crop residues on the soil surface. We know that under some circumstances, no-till is not always the best option, that you're going to need to use a little bit of minimum tillage, whether that's through strip till or a fall or spring para-till, that maybe that's the best option, but it's still considered conservation tillage. Also, we include a cover crop in our conservation systems. Most of our research is dealing with rye and crimson clover. We do have some research dealing with other cover crops. Our main goal is to keep the soil covered, exactly like David said. We want the soil covered. And I know this is the corn and wheat conference, or a short course, so wheat is keeping it covered in the winter through a commodity crop. So why do we need to adopt a conservation system in Alabama? These are things we've already talked about a lot. We have highly weathered soils. We have high rainfall, especially in the winter. We have high temperatures. We have high humidity. So as his demonstration here is showing wonderfully, we have low soil organic matters. So we want to try to raise our soil organic matter up. Excuse me. This would probably be easier than me pointing at the screen. So in the 2012 census of agriculture, I don't know how many of y'all filled that out that are producers. One of the questions that they asked that hadn't been asked before was about conservation on your land, specifically related to tillage and cover crops. And this is a lot of numbers, and I'm going to go through it quickly. We have about 2.8 million acres of cropland in Alabama. Not harvested cropland, that's cropland. So that includes pasture and grazing land that could be used for cropland. That includes land and cover crops. That includes idle land. That includes more than just your harvested cropland. So that's cropland. According to the census, we have about 380,000 acres in conventional tillage. That's 14% of cropland. We have about 312,000 acres in conservation tillage excluding no-till. If you look at the definitions in the census, no-till is not just no-till. It's actually defined as no-till and strip-till. So that's something to keep in mind, especially as you're filling out the census. It's important to read the definitions to make sure you understand the questions. That's about 11% of cropland. According to the census, we have almost 710,000 acres of conservation tillage, no-till. But I like to say no-till and strip-till. That's about 26% of our cropland acres in Alabama that are, according to the census, in no-till and strip-till. Then we have almost 200,000 acres of cover crops. That's about 7% of the cropland acres. I like to consider this the benchmark. This is the baseline for us. We don't really have this data coming from the census prior to 2012, so going into the next census, it's going to be interesting to see how those numbers have changed. That's great information that's being provided by the census that we haven't really had before at the state level. Just a little, I could stand here and talk about this data all day. I know I'm very excited about it because it does provide us with more information. This is based on a North American industry classification system, NAICS. I kind of combine some of them together. There isn't one called specialty crops, but that's horticulture, fluoriculture, all the non-traditional commodity crops. You have oil seed and grain, specialty crops, cotton. All other crops include peanuts, hay, sugar cane. Then you have livestock. I just grouped all the livestock together. Here for oil seed and grain, we have about, for the operations that are considered oil seed grain farms, we have about 650,000 acres. 8.5% of those are in cover crops. As you can see, the specialty crops, 10.9, almost 11% of those acres. There aren't that many in Alabama. This is for Alabama, not for the U.S. There's only about 100,000 acres of those that fall in that category in Alabama, and 11% of those are in cover crops. You can see where the majority of our cover crops are located, cotton. We have about almost 10.5% in cover crops. This is just good information so that we at the lab can understand how conservation systems are going to be applied on the land and who's adopting those. Why adopt a conservation system? In my prior life, I have something in common with David. I worked for NRCS for seven years, and one of the things we talked about was how do we get people to adopt conservation, and sometimes it can be very difficult. There are a lot of reasons why people don't adopt conservation, and one of those is how much it costs. What does it cost for me to adopt conservation? Because a lot of the benefits we receive from conservation are not recognized right now, not in the short term. They're long-term benefits. You may have to wait a few years before you actually see the benefit of that. So I'm going to talk about, briefly, what are the environmental benefits and the economic benefits? How much does it cost to do a conservation system as we define it in our research, and how does it fit into your current rotation? So David touched on some of these. These are the environmental benefits of a conservation system, obviously controlling soil erosion and reducing runoff. The first pictures were demonstrating of that. We would like to keep the soil on the land. That's one of the main reasons. Also increasing crop residue, we want to increase soil organic matter, and like we've talked about rainfall a lot, we've talked about irrigation. We want to absorb that rainfall impact. We want to improve soil quality. I'm going to go into these in a little more depth in a few slides over. Also increase plant available water. That's very important. Through conservation systems, we can increase plant available water. Improve water infiltration. Also reduce yield variability. So even in years where you have low yields, if you can decrease your yield variability in your field, then you're going to make more money on that field. So by reducing yield variability through conservation systems, you can reduce your risk. So increasing plant available water. This increases the efficiency of a rain irrigation event. We've talked a lot about irrigation this afternoon. And so by using a conservation system in conjunction with your irrigation, you can increase the efficiency of that irrigation event. Plus you can potentially lower your water requirements, which what happens when we lower our water requirements. We save money, right? So we're all about saving money because if we save money, we increase your profitability. We increase the bottom line. And we also need to preserve water resources. We do get a lot of rain in the winter, but at some point we may be at a place where it may change and we don't know that. And so we want to make sure that right now we preserve those water resources going into the future and ultimately lower our production costs because that in the end is the most important. This is just a demonstration of rainfall variability. This is Alabama. This data is from Evie Smith, which is the star. This is 63 years of rainfall data. I started it days since March the 1st. So this would be March the 1st. So this would be April, May, June, July, through December. So you can see the gray lines are the 63 years of data. The black line is the 63 year normal. The red line is 2009. So that's what we, the cumulative rainfall was what, almost 55 inches of rain in 270 days. And down here we have 2011 and 2010. And they're about the same at the end, but you notice when did you get the rain? And Dr. Ortiz and I were just talking about this. It's when you get the rain. So how did the, how was the rainfall distributed? We had a huge rain event right here. Notice that five inches of rain in a period of a day. What does that do to your field and to your crop? So we want to be able to help infiltrate that water and through a conservation system we can do this. And this, this variability, so here you have it here, 70 inches of rain. I'm not sure. I think this was in the 70s. Not positive on that. But you can see the yield variability that exists at this one location in Alabama. Not yield variability. I'm sorry. It's late. I'm tired too. So some of the, I want to go into a little bit of the benefits of cover crops. This is David touched on this a little bit, but I'm going to go through it because I want you, I just want to go over them. Improved soil quality, so increased soil organic matter. And I'm repeating this because it, I just, it tends to sink in I guess. A reduced soil erosion, improved soil structure and quality, improved soil fertility down here. The ones in orange are ones that we can kind of quantify. As an economist, at some times hard to put a value on every benefit of a conservation system. So we know that conservation have a lot of, conservation systems cover crops have a lot of benefits. But being able to put a value on every single one of those is not always the easiest thing. But we can put a value on supplying nitrogen and improving fertilizer use efficiency. Excuse me. Also reducing pest problems, suppressing weeds. If you have to, if you use a cover crop and you have to use less herbicide, that has an economic value to it. The same with reducing diseases and reducing nematodes. Other benefits may be a reduction in labor if you go, if you go from four passes with a tillage implement to no passes with a tillage implement, it's saving you time and it's saving you money. If you can maintain your yields and that's always the question. Using fuel use with prices going down, people tend to forget about that but we know what prices were for fuel. So it's extremely important. Reducing land prep costs. Somebody asked a question about fallow and I think it was you, David, was talking about have you seen a producer say, well, I've got cover out there, I've got weeds. Getting rid of those weeds has a cost. So when you're thinking about using a cover crop, you're saying, well, that cover crop is going to cost me money and it's going to cost me time, well, so is fallow because you still have to get rid of those weeds and depending on the severity of your weeds, you then have to, you have to control for that. You have to account for that. Also reducing irrigation requirements and improving water quality. You can put a value on water quality. It's even easier when you have regulation but I didn't make it orange because I don't. Let's try to stay away from it. Some of the costs of converting to a conservation system. You may need new or modified tillage equipment. If you're doing some sort of strip till or minimum tillage, also planting equipment, you may need to modify your planter to deal with high residue and you'll see why that's important in just a minute. Also, the cover crop establishment and termination is going to cost, is going to be a cost. There may be a learning curve for managing high residue cover crops and when we talk about high residue cover crops, we're talking about more than 4,000 pounds an acre. That's what we consider a high residue cover crop. There may be a learning curve of dealing with that much residue, limited experience with conservation tillage and or cover crops. Also, there may be a change in chemical use. It could be an increase. It could be a decrease depending on how well your cover crops do at suppressing those weeds. We hope it's a decrease in herbicide costs because you are suppressing those weeds. We've talked a lot about seeding rates. There may need to be an increase in seeding rates. We have a lot of really great information that comes out of the lab, especially in the form of fact sheets. They're all available on our website. I'll give you that website at the end. If you're not familiar with our lab or what our website is, you can go and get this. This is one of the fact sheets we have on modifying enrol subsoilers and planters for a high residue system. It just gives you an idea of what some of the options are for modifying your current equipment so that you can move into this kind of system. Also the cost of cover crops include establishment, labor, seed, planting, and fertilizer. My dad's a farmer and sometimes when I talk to him about the cost of what it's costing him to do, whatever he's doing, he says, well, the seed is costing me $20. Is that what it's costing you to do that? And he's like, yes. I'm like, well, what about your time? What about my time? He's like, I'm out there doing it anyway. Well, it still costs you money. Your time is valuable, especially as a producer, because you could be doing something else. So always include, when you're thinking about the cost of doing something, I always include labor because it's costing you money. You can either hire somebody to do it or you can do it yourself. Also termination, we use chemical and mechanical termination. There was a picture of a roller in the previous presentation. Dr. Kornicki has worked a lot with rollers at the lab. And so we use a chemical termination with glyphosate, traditionally, and then a mechanical termination with a roller. So it's rolled fat. And you can see that this is cotton, but you can see that. I think it's cotton, might be peanuts. You can see the blackouts rolled down and then it's been planted into. This is another example of a fact sheet. Every year I update our cover crop cost fact sheet. It includes the common cover crops that people may use. In Alabama, I call a couple of the seed providers in Alabama and Georgia to find out what their costs are for those seeds. And I include that in the fact sheet. I try to update it every year prior to fall. And then we also have fact sheets about the majority of cover crops that are probably grown in Alabama by producers. It includes the uses of those cover crops, the planting dates, seeding rates, what you can expect for residue production and nitrogen production in the case of cover crops that produce nitrogen, and also just a little bit about the cover crops. Cover crop establishment, I've talked about the cost of planting a cover crop. We use a high, our research includes a high intensity, high management cover crop. We, when we use rye, we see 90 pounds of rye. Now you say, holy moly, 90 pounds of rye. So that's what we include because we're trying to get the most biomass to increase our soil organic matter. We also fertilize our rye. So you can see here, this is fertilized rye. This is non-fertilized rye. We recommend 30 pounds per acre. That's what we use in our research the majority of the time. And that's what you'll see in a minute. I kind of give you an example cost. And I know it's sometimes sticker shock for people. This is a termination. We have a termination fact sheet that talks about all the different factors that go into deciding when you terminate your cover crop because it's very important. This is an example of a roller. So you can see here, this is our rye. This is in one of our treatment, or one of our experiments. And you can see the roller back here. If Dr. Krunicki was here, he would have a great video. I don't know if you've ever seen his presentation, but he has a wonderful video of showing his rollers in use and it's great, but I don't have it today. So this is a roller and it's rolling the rye down and then we plant into it. I'm going to talk a little bit more about this data in a minute, but this is just an example just to show the differences in biomass production related to termination. This is an experiment that took place in Prattville, Alabama at the experiment station there between 2004 and 2009, that six years of data. It was a corn-cotton rotation experiment. We used two different cover crops, rye and wheat. So the wheat was terminated. It wasn't harvested for a commodity crop. So as you can see, we had less than 4,000 pounds per acre of biomass when we had to terminate the cover crop before corn. We terminated that in March before planting of corn. And then for the cotton, we let that go another month. And you can see the increase in biomass just from that additional month of growth. So if you can imagine now here we're dealing with, in 2006, we were dealing with over 10,000 pounds per acre of rye biomass before cotton. So that's a lot of residue and you have to manage that. So this is an example of what I usually use for our costs to do cover crops in our research at the lab. So I have a cereal rye, 90 pounds. Cereal rye is very expensive right now. It's 57 to 58 cents a pound. So it's the primary cost. Then we no-till drill fertilizer in the application and then we have the chemical and the mechanical termination for a total cost of $93. But that's with 90 pounds of rye. That's the Cadillac of rye cover crops. It's a high management, high intensity cover crop. I like to also include this. I said break even corn yields, but it really could be yield equivalents. So if you have a $90 cover crop, that's equivalent at $3.50 corn. That's equivalent to about 26 bushels. So as that number, as you lower your cost of your cover crop through lower cost seed or through different methods of planting the cover crop or whatnot, you'll see that that number goes down. The good thing about having not enough time is you can skip through the slides you don't really like. So I'm going to talk a little bit about some of our research, two different projects, one's on corn and one's on wheat. This one is related to the biomass data that we just looked at, but it was in Prattville, Alabama from 2004 to 2009. It was dry land, cotton and corn. It kind of is right before Brenda talked about her research at Prattville. This is kind of in the years before that 2004 through 2009. We had four tillage treatments, fall peritill, spring peritill, spring strip till, and a no-till treatment. That is we didn't have a conventional till treatment, so these are all a minimum tillage treatment or conservation tillage. And then we had three cover crop treatments. I called it corn residue, it was fallow, but there was a lot of corn residue out there. So the ground was covered. And then rye and wheat, it was on a Lucidale fine sandy loam. Dr. Balkum has a paper that covered the cover crop biomass in the solar organic carbon, but the yield data and the net return data hasn't been published. Just to give you an idea, there's a Togga County where Prattville is. This is where that soil series is located. You can see the field, this plot, this area where we did the experiment had been in conventional cotton for the previous 10 years. So it had been, I would say, so conventional cotton for the previous 10 years. Let's just leave it at that. So this is another example of the biomass, I'm not going to talk about it because we just did. In 2006, we had the highest biomass for rye and wheat was in 2008. So this is the rainfall from that time. How many of you remember 2006 and 2007? Can we think back that far? It was dry. So in Prattville, we had cumulative from the days of planting. We had about seven inches of rain. In 2007, we had approximately four and a half inches of rain, I think. I might be off a little bit. I'm looking at it sideways. So you can see these two years, we had very little rainfall over the time period. This is a picture from June of 03, I mean June the 3rd, 2005 versus July 11th, 2006. You can see the difference in what the corn looks like, even though it's not the same time frame. I had to throw, we threw 2006 data out because we didn't have any. No yields. So this is just a comparison of the corn yields from this experiment. And I'm not going to talk about the cotton, obviously I don't have time, but I wasn't going to talk about it anyway. So the red is Alabama average corn yields. The blue is the Taga County average corn yields. For some reason, NAS didn't have those averages for 2008 and 2009. And then the green are our experimental yields. So you can see we were up around the state average in 2004 and 2005 because we had a tiny bit of yield in 2006, but not enough to matter. And then in 2007 and 2008 and 2009, we were below the Alabama average, but the Alabama average includes irrigated land as well. So it's not just dry land, it's dry land and irrigated land. So that's always important to remember when you're looking at state averages, if they're not broken out by irrigation. Oh gosh. Okay, so this is the, so down here on the very bottom, it's broken up by fall peritil, no-till, spring-till, and strip-till, and then residue. So corn residue, rye, and wheat. So I grouped them by years because it's a lot of data. So this is 2004, 2005. You can see there's not a huge difference here. So like for spring peritil and strip-till, you have the rye and the wheat being the highest yields. So you can see the yields, except for no-till, the yields are pretty equivalent when you have residue and then a cover crop. And the same thing is really true for the other years. You can see that down here with strip-till, rye and wheat did better in 2008 and 2009 than the residue. I'm going to go straight into the treatment costs and net returns because that's my specialty, I guess. I assumed $4.66 for strip-till. Peritil is $8.82, regardless of timing because it's just a timing issue. Cover crops didn't include the cost of chemical termination because once again, fallow is not free. There is a cost to terminate the weeds, the winter weeds on the no cover. So I didn't include the cost of chemical termination. This is only the cost of seeding, establishment, and termination with mechanical termination. So the interaction between tillage and cover crops was not statistically significant except in 2007, but I didn't include that for the sake of time. I mean, you can see in 2004, 2005, spring peritil and strip-till, there's no significant difference. 2007, no, which was the driest year. No-till did the best, had the highest net returns above. This is net returns above variable treatment costs. So we're only talking about treatment costs, so the things that differ between treatments, not your total variable costs. In 2008, 2009, similar results with no-till doing the best. When you look at cover crops, okay, now I'm talking a lot, when you look at cover crops, you have the corn residue did the best with regards to net returns above variable treatment costs. Directly related to the cost of our cover crops. Because if you notice in the yield slide back here, cover crop yields, the yields with the cover crop treatments were just as good as numerically or better than the residue. So in conclusion, when we've been talking about this at the office is that we had some questions that came out of this, so whether, how did the yields in 2008 and 2009 were less than the yields in 2004 and 2005, however, the rainfall was almost the same. So how did the drought in 2006 and 2007, how did that impact the yields in 2008 and 2009 and did it? And that's a question that we're thinking about. Also the corn residue, we had corn residue out there. How did that corn residue, what role did it play in the success of the no-till, no-cover treatment? So no-till did great, but the no-cover treatment, how did it play a role in that? How did it play a role in the no-till, no-cover treatment doing so well? Also cover crop intensity, and this is of interest to me, can a cheaper cover crop system provide similar results in corn at a lower cost? And that's, I think, an important question we have to ask. So wheat production, real quick. Dr. Balkam's going to talk about this tomorrow, so I'm going to be super speedy. For locations across Alabama, they're grouped by soil type limestone valley at Tennessee Valley and coastal plains as EV Smith, Wiregrass and Gulf Coast, 08 to 011, depending on location. We had two tillage treatments, no-till and conventional. They weren't necessarily the same between locations. So EV Smith, the coastal plains had four passes for the conventional while Tennessee Valley only had one, and then we had 12 fertilizer treatments. I assumed a price of $5.72 of bushel. We did have test weight data, so I included that because it's extremely important when you're calculating the price of your wheat, and you all know that. So I did include that when I was calculating the returns, as expected. So these are our fertilizer treatments. We had a fall applied at either 0 or 20, application at Feeks 4, at 30, 45, 30, 40. We basically were looking at 60, 90, and 120 pounds at end. And so that was just broken up between fall, Feeks 4, and or Feeks 6. So the most expensive option was $82 an acre, and that was option number 6, with 60 pounds at Feeks 4 and 60 pounds at Feeks 6. I assumed a nitrogen price of 58 pounds of nitrogen. So these are the preliminary results. You see no-till, non-inversion, depending on location, had the highest net returns above variable treatment costs. So regardless of location, no-till, non-inversion had higher returns than conventional tillage and wheat. For the fertilizer, treatment 8, which is fall applied 20, 70 at Feeks 4, was not statistically different from fall applied 20, Feeks applied 40. Regardless of location, there was a significant location interaction with fertilizer treatment. So I'll show that next, because this, I think, is the most – this is Limestone Valley. How many of you all live up in that neck in northern Alabama? So you're getting higher – based on our research, you're getting higher yields than in southern Alabama, or mid-Alabama. So this shows the ones in blue were not statistically different. This is just at the highest level. So the highest net returns of variable treatment costs were at 373, and that was number 7, which, based on the previous slide, that's 20 fall applied and 40 at Feeks 4. For the coastal plains areas, because these are all grouped together, 8 and 9 were not statistically different, and that would be 8 is 20 fall applied and 70 at Feeks 4 and 9 would be 20 fall applied and 100 at Feeks 4. So I'm going to let Dr. Balkum talk about this experiment some more. I just – tomorrow I just wanted to show you the economics of that, and the net returns above variable treatment costs to give you an idea of how the conservation works within wheat with no-till. So some concluding thoughts. The best conservation system is the one that fits your operation the best, and we know that as we go into our research. It's site-specific, and it has to be based on the goals of your operation, and I've heard several people talk about the goals of their operation like Annie D. did, and so you have to look at the goals of your operation and what's going to work best. So many of the benefits of conservation systems are hard to quantify. So even though the cost may be $90, let's say, there are a lot of other benefits that accrue to – like you can see here – that accrue to a conservation system that are hard to put an actual dollar value on, but they can't be forgotten. You have to consider those. The preliminary results show that no-till corn is a viable option in Alabama, dependent on location. No-till non-inversion wheat provided the highest net returns above variable treatment costs, and the highest net returns to wheat were realized at 20 pounds of in per acre in the fall, with 40 pounds of in per acre at Feaks 4 in the Limestone Valley, and very similar except with 70 at 70 pounds at Feaks 4 in the coastal plains. The final slide. We have a newsletter that goes out twice a year. We don't spam you. We don't send you a bunch of stuff all the time. We just send you the newsletter and occasionally a fact sheet if it's really good. And so, this is our website where you can get more information about what I've talked about. Also, if you send us an email to this email address, we can subscribe you to our newsletter, which we send out via email, and it has a lot of great information on it about what we're doing at the lab plus our publication that we've put out if you have more interest in what we're doing. So, with that, I'll take some questions, I guess. Yes, sir. Are you working with Extension to do the experiment on its research plots on the plant? You know what? I'm going to let Dr. Balkum answer that because I piggyback myself on to the other scientist research, so I'm going to let them answer that. We have done some of that, but the majority of our research is on the experiment station, but we have done some, because you said, quantitatively, it's hard to show, but we'll understand, but some of these neighborhoods don't really seem to be doing a little better, but I know it's hard to make that change with equipment. And I think that's a joke about being a conservation salesperson, but that's one way I think we do sell conservation. It's when you have people adopt it and they go out and talk about it and they talk about the benefits that they visibly see, that's anecdotal, that they see on their operation, that's the best way that we get people to do conservation systems. I can stand up here and talk about our research all I want to, but somebody is out there saying, well, I use less herbicide, so that's saving me money. Well, we can't change that in our experiment. It has to stay the same regardless of treatment. So that's a cost that I can't quantify because we haven't changed it. And so you're right. When you have a producer that can sell it to their neighbor, that's the best way that we have of getting people to get that from 7% of crop landing cover crops up to 100. Yes, sir? Do you see a yield hit when you move into conservation ag and do you quantify those prices across? You know, if you look at that, that's a hard question to answer. If you look at the corn, that corn-cotton rotation, I don't know what that was in conventional cotton before then. I don't know what experiments came out of that. So going from that conventional cotton into a conservation system with a rotation of corn and cotton, you know, the yields for corn were 120 bushels acre. That's average for Alabama for the whole state. So I would say those are pretty good dry land corn yields in that location. So I don't know what the conventional yield would have been because we didn't have a conventional treatment there. But I think that's a great question. It's one that should be looked at. Yes, sir? Can you clarify what you're calling a no-till? Is it strict just getting the seed in the ground or are you doing strict till? In the case of the wheat, for example, at Tennessee Valley it was traditional no-till, nothing. Just planting. But at the Gulf Coast, it didn't have a subsoil. It had a subsoil. It passed with a subsoiler. If we do try to make that distinction though, like she showed the corn test, she showed the corn test with the no-till and that was strictly planting directly into that as well. So we try to make the distinction, you know, that strip till is strip till and no-till is no-till because a lot of times people just kind of run those all together and say no-till when they're really might be doing strip till. So we really do try to, if we say no-till, it's no-tillage. I mean, you just plant it right into it. And that's the distinction I was trying to make with the NAS data from the census is that it says no-till but if you read the definition, it's no-till strip till. Well, I appreciate you all hanging around to the very end and I hope you all enjoy the course. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.