Covert Lora System- link up to 9 cams

[Tamarack]

I used to have a large stock of covert cams probably close to 6 years old now. and could count on about 2/3 of the pics being squirrels or leaves blowing not a big issue with cards but data presents a problem have the sensor issues gotten any better?

I only have the two I mentioned above and haven't had a problem with leaves etc blowing. Picks up the squirrels easily, I don't know if the lowest sensitivity level would stop that or not- hopefully others can comment. Even got my first what looks like ermine, with a mouse, on the one cam. Barely sensed it before it went out of view or it jumped up on the log there.

 

[yoderjac]

What you are doing is essentially what I'd like to get to someday. That sounds seriously impressive. One thing I wanted to do if and when I get something like that up and going is running some regression with buck and/or deer sightings against something like barometric pressure, wind direction, temperature, etc (within and across stand locations). That type of setup has tremendous potential for surveying a big enough area.

Have you thought about monetizing your work? I'm sure some camera companies or companies like OnX currently have teams working on it.

There are plenty of commercial products out there you can buy. They basically put a trail cam specific GUI over a database. I'm sure they work great and address all of the things you are thing of doing. The problem for me is that they are fixed. They each have their own way of looking at the data, but that is is, their way. That is fine for most users and the only option if they don't have technical skills. Since I have the basic skills, my homebrew version gives me the full flexibility of a relational database. I'm able to ask questions of the database that I never considered asking when I set it up.

Here is a quick example: Our hunters were complaining about deer numbers being down at one point. It comes from a natural bias we all have based on anecdotal observations. I took our data set and did some fancy queries including solar tables. I basically classified every picture as either during or outside shooting hours. I then plotted the data across Julian date with our approximate season start and end dates identified. I used 4 or 5 years worth of data.

What was happening was obvious. Daytime pictures peaked in August and early September. The total number of pictures was pretty flat over the year with only slight ups and downs. As guys started checking stands in September before our early October bow season opener, you started to see a slow decline in daytime pictures. The decline in daytime pictures got steeper during muzzleloader season. There was a slight hump during the chase phase of the rut. By the time firearm season rolls around the decline in daytime picture gets even sharper and a week or so in, deer have become almost completely nocturnal. Yet, the total picture count was about the same.

I never would have considered that question when I started collecting data. However, I was able to convince hunters to keep shooting does when we needed that done based on this chart.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Greg Gross]

Most of that data will work during bow season but once the rut hits the data will be useless, when our county in Missouri had a 4 point restriction ( on one side only to be legal buck) for over 5 years we say am increase in buck growth which was nice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yoderjac]

Most of that data will work during bow season but once the rut hits the data will be useless, when our county in Missouri had a 4 point restriction ( on one side only to be legal buck) for over 5 years we say am increase in buck growth which was nice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was not true in our case. The graft showed that hunting pressure was a bigger driver than the rut when it came to day vs night activity. Deer activity certainly increased during the rut, but by far, the lion's share was at night. The rut is pretty obvious in the overall data, but it is barely perceptible in the daytime data.

This data was not used for QDM decision making, it was used to convince hunters that they needed to follow the recommendations on doe harvest. While the cameras do run 24/7/365 collecting data, we don't use all of that data for QDM decision purposes. The 24/7/365 collections help with trespass and poaching control and rack assessment and such. We extract data from Jan (after the season) through April. This gives us a year on year indication of survival. We then extract another data set during the month of September before our archery season begins. By then, we can easily differentiate bucks from does from fawns. This data can give us a year on year sense of recruitment. We can also use it to monitor Buck to Doe ratios to some degree. We don't use bait at our camera locations. As far as I know, there is no established protocol for a non-baited survey. This means while we can see year to year trends pretty well, we don't have a validated algorithm for estimating absolute numbers.

The data has been invaluable in helping us establish female harvest objectives each year. By looking at trends in numbers at individual camera location rather than aggregating the data allows us to see how home of our large scale habitat projects influence how deer relate to the land. It has really shown us the impact of large scale habitat changes. While they can improve the BCC in the long run, they can have unpredictable impacts on deer movement and thus hunting success. Deer adapt very quickly.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[Greg Gross]

Jack that may be true but our 200 acres in Missouri we do selective harvest and so does the farmers around our farm, we have a total of about 10,000 acres around us but one farmer is if it’s brown it’s down attitude.

We usually harvest 140-160 class buck a year here are some pics of what we see on our farm.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yoderjac]

Jack that may be true but our 200 acres in Missouri we do selective harvest and so does the farmers around our farm, we have a total of about 10,000 acres around us but one farmer is if it’s brown it’s down attitude.

We usually harvest 140-160 class buck a year here are some pics of what we see on our farm.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice deer but I'm not sure how that relates to the usability of the data.

 

[Greg Gross]

Yoderjack I wasn’t trying to start a argument I was just stating with multiple farms all land owners would have to do quality management to produce mixes deer.

Statistics are nice to have and help with herd management


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yoderjac]

Yoderjack I wasn’t trying to start a argument I was just stating with multiple farms all land owners would have to do quality management to produce mixes deer.

Statistics are nice to have and help with herd management


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wasn't intending to argue either. I was referring to your post below that suggests the data is useless after archery season. I thought the post above was trying to support that argument. I will say that mast crops do show up in the data. We keep track of those as well. In heavy mast crop years, picture counts are down even more and deer are even more sensitive to pressure.

I'm in complete agreement that QDM requires significant scale. Either you own a lot of land or you have cooperating neighbors.

Most of that data will work during bow season but once the rut hits the data will be useless, when our county in Missouri had a 4 point restriction ( on one side only to be legal buck) for over 5 years we say am increase in buck growth which was nice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Greg Gross]

What crops in you ur area have you seen the deer like best


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JLemon]

I bought the 3 pack LoRa system when it was first released in November. Maybe things have got better in the past 2 months but mine did not work as advertised and others on the Covert forum were having the same issue. The first was distance between Home and remotes. I could not get much more than 100 yards before signal strength was at 0. 1 remote never connected. This was in a wide open area with the Home on the tallest hill on my property (as Covert asks you to do) and nothing between the home and remote. The next problem was fluctuating signals strength. It would bounce between 75 and 0 20 feet from the home unit. The last was not sending pictures and pictures not sent timely. When I pulled 1 remote it had 60 pictures but had sent 6 back to the home. I imagine this was because of signal strength. I did several online chats with CS but nothing helped. They even ship it with an "extended range' antenna that's about 3 feet tall. It didn't get any better signal than the smaller antennas did but it leads me to believe they knew they have signal issues if they're packing the bigger antenna with them. They do not daisy chain and they market that like it's an improvement over Cuddelink. As I said earlier there were others experiencing the same issues as I was. Covert promptly refunded my money but I do hope they get the bugs worked out as I think there is potential in the system.

 

[yoderjac]

I bought the 3 pack LoRa system when it was first released in November. Maybe things have got better in the past 2 months but mine did not work as advertised and others on the Covert forum were having the same issue. The first was distance between Home and remotes. I could not get much more than 100 yards before signal strength was at 0. 1 remote never connected. This was in a wide open area with the Home on the tallest hill on my property (as Covert asks you to do) and nothing between the home and remote. The next problem was fluctuating signals strength. It would bounce between 75 and 0 20 feet from the home unit. The last was not sending pictures and pictures not sent timely. When I pulled 1 remote it had 60 pictures but had sent 6 back to the home. I imagine this was because of signal strength. I did several online chats with CS but nothing helped. They even ship it with an "extended range' antenna that's about 3 feet tall. It didn't get any better signal than the smaller antennas did but it leads me to believe they knew they have signal issues if they're packing the bigger antenna with them. They do not daisy chain and they market that like it's an improvement over Cuddelink. As I said earlier there were others experiencing the same issues as I was. Covert promptly refunded my money but I do hope they get the bugs worked out as I think there is potential in the system.

Pretty typical. 900 mhz is challenging. Keep in mind that larger antennas (larger in db) are directional. So, if your signal is not improving, it can be several things, but the first to check is pointing accuracy. I don't have Covert, but I've been using a 900mhz wireless system for over 10 years on a very challenging environment (pine farm). High gain antennas get the gain advantage by moving it from back to front (yagi) or top and bottom to middle (Horizontal Omni with donut pattern). I don't know how Covert is setup, but you also get loss as the signal travels through coax between the radio and antenna. I've got large 13 db yagi antennas that are mounted high on my pace and a few cameras. Because the antennas were mounted high, I used 400-series cable.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[yoderjac]

What crops in you ur area have you seen the deer like best


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When I started, deer would eat anything I planted. We have no row crops within 3 miles or so. Food was the limiting factor when we started. Now that we have done a lot of habitat work improving our native foods, as well and instituting a major food plot program, deer are becoming more selective, but not the way you might think. Deer in our area are much more sensitive to hunting pressure than crop selection. Once hunting pressure starts, they eat mostly quality native foods in cover during shooting hours and use our food plots after dark. Which particular crops they prefer changes over time. There is not crop that is consistently preferred over time. Each crop we plant has its own peak.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[JLemon]

Pretty typical. 900 mhz is challenging. Keep in mind that larger antennas (larger in db) are directional. So, if your signal is not improving, it can be several things, but the first to check is pointing accuracy. I don't have Covert, but I've been using a 900mhz wireless system for over 10 years on a very challenging environment (pine farm). High gain antennas get the gain advantage by moving it from back to front (yagi) or top and bottom to middle (Horizontal Omni with donut pattern). I don't know how Covert is setup, but you also get loss as the signal travels through coax between the radio and antenna. I've got large 13 db yagi antennas that are mounted high on my pace and a few cameras. Because the antennas were mounted high, I used 400-series cable.

Thanks,

Jack

The high gain antenna is on the home base unit so in this case it could not be pointed as the remote cameras are several different directions from the base unit. I don't know what frequency Cuddelink uses but I typically got 500+ yards between Home and remotes in heavy cover.

 

[cheech53]

The high gain antenna is on the home base unit so in this case it could not be pointed as the remote cameras are several different directions from the base unit. I don't know what frequency Cuddelink uses but I typically got 500+ yards between Home and remotes in heavy cover.

JLemon sorry to butt in on your post with yoderjac but I had to ask about the high gain antenna , did it work to increase your RF signal ?
what make and db is it and is it a rubber duck , I have been reading All of yaderjak post he seam to be the most helpful and informative about this information . I have read may of your posts on ( Cuddeback of America Facebook forum ) every time I bring this subject up in there it never go anywhere I Thank You and yaderjak for talking about this I enjoy reading and trying this with my system

 

[JLemon]

JLemon sorry to butt in on your post with yoderjac but I had to ask about the high gain antenna , did it work to increase your RF signal ?
what make and db is it and is it a rubber duck , I have been reading All of yaderjak post he seam to be the most helpful and informative about this information . I have read may of your posts on ( Cuddeback of America Facebook forum ) every time I bring this subject up in there it never go anywhere I Thank You and yaderjak for talking about this I enjoy reading and trying this with my system

The antenna is packaged by Covert. It's on their website, it's round and about 3 feet tall with a 10 foot coax cable the goes to the Home unit. According to the specs its a 7dbi gain but I didn't see any difference in signal using the regular antenna or this one. Hopefully firmware or something else gets this system working as advertised.

 

[cheech53]

The antenna is packaged by Covert. It's on their website, it's round and about 3 feet tall with a 10 foot coax cable the goes to the Home unit. According to the specs its a 7dbi gain but I didn't see any difference in signal using the regular antenna or this one. Hopefully firmware or something else gets this system working as advertised.

Thanks I read about that one by covert but using a 7dbi is probably not enough because of the cord size and length , I thought I read a post from yaderjak said he uses them from L-com , maybe he can comment on the specifics again , have you ever experimented with a ( rat tail ) for a ground plane to the antenna

 

[JLemon]

Thanks I read about that one by covert but using a 7dbi is probably not enough because of the cord size and length , I thought I read a post from yaderjak said he uses them from L-com , maybe he can comment on the specifics again , have you ever experimented with a ( rat tail ) for a ground plane to the antenna

No I just did the steps CS asked me to do which was pretty basic. I mean there shouldn't be some magical formula to get them to work. Turn them on, put in some settings on the home, get a connection and put everything in the woods. If there was a better antenna that got a consistent connection out to 300-400 yards, which is far from what they advertise, I would be happy to try them again but it would be pretty hard to pry the Ridgetec Lookouts from my hands at this point. CS even told me that the signal bouncing to 0 was perfectly fine although all the pictures on the remotes that didn't get sent home tells me different and they never did solve the one remote never getting a connection.

 

[yoderjac]

The high gain antenna is on the home base unit so in this case it could not be pointed as the remote cameras are several different directions from the base unit. I don't know what frequency Cuddelink uses but I typically got 500+ yards between Home and remotes in heavy cover.

You need to understand the antenna pattern of whatever antennas you are using. I'm using a high gain yagi on my base, but it is at the south west corner of our property and all of the cameras are in the beamwidth of the primary lobe. For applications where cameras are in different directions, the best you can do at the base is a high gain omni. You can buy those up to about 8db versus 13 or 14 for a yagi. Then, put your high gain yagi antennas on the cameras and point them at the base.

Cuddelink uses the same frequency range. What you consider heavy cover may not be the kind of stuff that attenuates the signal. From reading the Cuddelink thread, that is a very good distance for most users. I don't see many folks reporting a transmission distance any further than that. A heavy environment is one that contains a lot of water. Thick pine tops are the worst I've seen. I'm on a pine farm and with my high end system, my longest real-world transmission distance is about twice that. That is using high gain elevated antennas mounted high to reduce the amount of pines I'm going through. It is not how much cover you home base or remote camera is in. It is the total amount of attenuation across the signal path between the two.

One reason cell cams work is that they are transmitting at a different frequency, but that cell towers are very high. So, a camera in heavy cover only needs to transmit through 30' or so to get through the understory and then have a clean path to the tower. That is different than when both ends are terrestrial transmitting generally horizontally.

If you read through the cuddelink thread, you will see lots of issues folks are having. Most companies use the public as beta users and let them pay for the privilege. Covert is new to the market so I would expect a host of issues. RF transmission at these frequencies is not easy.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[JLemon]

You need to understand the antenna pattern of whatever antennas you are using. I'm using a high gain yagi on my base, but it is at the south west corner of our property and all of the cameras are in the beamwidth of the primary lobe. For applications where cameras are in different directions, the best you can do at the base is a high gain omni. You can buy those up to about 8db versus 13 or 14 for a yagi. Then, put your high gain yagi antennas on the cameras and point them at the base.

Cuddelink uses the same frequency range. What you consider heavy cover may not be the kind of stuff that attenuates the signal. From reading the Cuddelink thread, that is a very good distance for most users. I don't see many folks reporting a transmission distance any further than that. A heavy environment is one that contains a lot of water. Thick pine tops are the worst I've seen. I'm on a pine farm and with my high end system, my longest real-world transmission distance is about twice that. That is using high gain elevated antennas mounted high to reduce the amount of pines I'm going through. It is not how much cover you home base or remote camera is in. It is the total amount of attenuation across the signal path between the two.

One reason cell cams work is that they are transmitting at a different frequency, but that cell towers are very high. So, a camera in heavy cover only needs to transmit through 30' or so to get through the understory and then have a clean path to the tower. That is different than when both ends are terrestrial transmitting generally horizontally.

If you read through the cuddelink thread, you will see lots of issues folks are having. Most companies use the public as beta users and let them pay for the privilege. Covert is new to the market so I would expect a host of issues. RF transmission at these frequencies is not easy.

Thanks,

Jack

It looks like you worked out some of the bugs but I'm not going to buy a new system then turn around and buy different antennas just to make it work. Cuddeback doesn't use a special directional antenna on the Cuddelink but still manages to get good distances between remotes and home. I hope Covert can do the same. I used Cuddelink for 3 years and eventually had 11 remotes that worked flawlessly. I lost the property I was hunting so I ended up selling everything.

 

[yoderjac]

It looks like you worked out some of the bugs but I'm not going to buy a new system then turn around and buy different antennas just to make it work. Cuddeback doesn't use a special directional antenna on the Cuddelink but still manages to get good distances between remotes and home. I hope Covert can do the same. I used Cuddelink for 3 years and eventually had 11 remotes that worked flawlessly. I lost the property I was hunting so I ended up selling everything.

I had no bugs to work out with my system. Cuddelink is giving you 1/2 the distance I'm getting and I'm on a pine farm with the worst RF environment short of transmitting through the ground which you can't at this frequency. When it comes to RF transmission at 900 mhz the limitation is the FCC. There are some protocols like the one my BECs are using that may help reduce packet loss. Frequency hopping or other spread spectrum techniques can help with interference. However, once you've done that and you reach the FCC power limit, the rest is physics.

If cuddelink works for your application, why change? The transmission distances you and others are reporting are about 1/2 of what I'm getting and what I need. Customizing the network topology with the right antennas at the right places is key to a good system. Mine has been running over 10 years 24/7/365. The biggest challenge once a company has good protocols and hit the FCC power limit is to balance power consumption. RF transmission takes much more power than operating the camera. Cudde addresses this by limiting you to transmitting thumbnail size pictures. My system transmits full resolution pictures and uses large SLA batteries with solar panels. I've got things balanced so that batteries only need changed every year or two. Transmitting thumbnail sized pictures may be fine for some applications like hunting. For collecting QDM decision data, thumbnail size pictures are inadequate. Having to retrieve SD cards for full size pictures completely defeats the primary purpose of a wireless system for my application.

There are some other application where cudde link may work for me. This would include application where reliability is not important and lost data and triggers don't hurt you and required transmission distance would need to be relatively short. Cuddeback does not let the user balance power like my older system. The cameras determine signal path on their own based primarily on signal strength. With full size pictures that can quickly cause a power consumption cascade unless you drop pictures when no path is found.

Every system has it's plusses and minuses. The negative on mine is up front cost, but because of the lifespan and reliability, if I amortize those costs over the life of the system, they are probably less expensive in the long run. Cudde is cheaper up front. Who knows if Covert will ever get things worked out or how long they will last in this market. So far, I've seen nothing impressive except the buzz words they use.