It almost certainly won't happen, but there would be a massive chunk of land at stake if Minnesota and Iowa could somehow go undefeated between now and October 28th.
That's just an awful map. A) no labels, looks like Pennsylvania is pushing blue berries and B) no way candy corn is the "favorite" anywhere, maybe most sold on a per unit thing - misleading title. Fixed...
Not bad, Florida... Side story, when I was a kid, I would always get the 1/2 strawberry, 1/2 grape nerds and only eat the strawberry half. (That may have been the only flavors they made back then.)
Texas would like some something soft and fluffy and named after a few frenchmen... soft-ass state. Spoiler Just playin'. Also, I had a mint 3 Musketeers a long time ago, but it was delicious.
Except for Mississippi, I don't think that there is any agreement between those two maps. Even the weird Hot Tamale in the frozen north jumped a state. I'm starting to question the integrity of the candy map industry.
1st map source is online bulk candy seller CandyStore.com. Which actually makes more sense, because there aren't too many candy bars in that one. 2nd map - "That's according to a recent survey by Influenster, a website that hosts product reviews. The company asked 23,154 Americans to name their favorite Halloween candy out of a list of 52 top-selling candies in the United States, and then found the most distinctively popular candy in each state." In review, 1st map is skewed objective data, while the 2nd map is strictly subjective data.
It’s one of those things that you only eat once a year. So you spend 360 days forgetting how bad they taste.
"Distinctively popular" - got it. I guess a map of nothing but Reese cups wouldn't be that interesting after all.
Honestly, I'm actually pretty happy that I've been able to waste time this morning looking at America's candy map disparities.
Having lived in both Indiana and Michigan, I really wanna know the methodology that had them with 100 Grand
There is, it's just that those states are huge and there's also a lot of desert and plains out there too.
surprised Louisiana is so low, but upon further thought I guess they categorize wetlands separately from forest.
Yeah, almost everything below I-10 counts as marsh or has become farmland, and over time farmers also cut down everything along the Miss. River - otherwise the number would be higher. Indiana is crazy to me. The state used to be close to 100% forest and now theyre at 19%.
my guess is something like this Forest land: Land that has at least 10 percent crown cover by live tally trees of any size or has had at least 10 percent canopy cover of live tally species in the past, based on the presence of stumps, snags, or other evidence. To qualify, the area must be at least 1.0 acre in size and 120.0 feet wide. Forest land includes transition zones, such as areas between forest and nonforest lands that meet the minimal tree stocking/cover and forest areas adjacent to urban and built—up lands. Roadside, streamside, and shelterbelt strips of trees must have a width of at least 120 feet and continuous length of at least 363 feet to qualify as forest land. Unimproved roads and trails, streams, and clearings in forest areas are classified as forest if they are less than 120 feet wide or less than an acre in size. Tree-covered areas in agricultural production settings, such as fruit orchards, or tree—covered areas in urban settings, such as city parks, are not considered forest land.
I was always told before Ohio was developed into farm land a squirrel could go all the way across Ohio without touching the ground. It would be forest/swamp land but it would be cool to bring it back.