I n "Traditional market-animal projects positively influence 4-H enrollment", Davy et al. (April-June 2020) use a general linear model to explore the influence on 4-H enrollment of several variables: year, region, population density, and whether the young person enrolled in a beef, sheep or swine project. Their core finding is a statistically significant relationship between swine, sheep and cattle project and 4-H community club enrollment. My critique of the paper is not with the finding that animal projects have a relationship with 4-H enrollment (previous analyses also show they do; Lewis et al. 2015), but rather that the authors do not build on the extensive literature and oversimplify the complex human dynamics involved in 4-H enrollment. These flaws have important consequences, as I detail here.