|
Post by vortex100 on Jan 16, 2011 0:43:07 GMT -5
It seems I need to explain what I'm proposing a little better. I'm not against tele-check, and if it was in place today I would use it. From all the post etc: I came to the understanding that it would take 5 years or so before tele-check would be considered again. Also, I'm not considering online check-in as the one and only option. Online check-in would be in addition to the current check-in process (a check-in station).
If the DNR would add online check-in as a 2nd option they would need to decide about the non-resident hunters. More than likely they would need to just check-in deer at a check-in station as it is today.
I checked-in a doe this Dec and basically did all the work myself - told the guy the sex, time of day, weapon, etc. He wrote down all the info and handed me the deer tag (the metal one) and said have a good day. He didn't look at the deer or put the tag on. Why couldn't I just do that from home? Of course technically they are supposed to put the tag on the animal.
A few days ago I did email the DNR about an online check-in option: once I get a response I will post it.
I would rather see something change now instead of waiting 5 years for them to turn down tele-check again because of cost.
|
|
|
Post by tenring on Jan 16, 2011 5:40:28 GMT -5
Drive 110 miles from central Indiana to Jefferson County, leaving computer at home, stay in landowners house for 10 days, no computer access, harvest deer on different days from opening Saturday until I leave a week later, better have a 2nd option for check-in if the 48 hours requirement would still be in effect, toll free number to do it? Inquiring minds are curious.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jan 16, 2011 6:13:18 GMT -5
They don't even have to put the tag on the animal.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 16, 2011 8:11:32 GMT -5
This is from another site. The gentleman that posted it has been a telecheck supporter for a long time and did a lot of good ground work on it.Telecheck could be implemented in a way that actually saves money. DNR's analysis includes a mechanism for counting deer hunters. This adds substantially to the hassle and cost of "telecheck". If the counting portion is removed, telecheck saves money over the current paper system. When I petitioned for Telecheck, I did so because I believe it is a better system. The one that DNR came up with is not what I wanted. Here is an analysis of the Return on Investment based on the quotes received by DNR. The bottom line is that by any reasonable analysis, Telecheck is more efficient, costs less and returns better data than the current system. And there is no objective proof that poaching increases or that the Mom-n-Pops that check deer will go out of business as a result.
|
|
|
Post by deweydutchmen on Jan 16, 2011 8:35:39 GMT -5
Plus it gets people to the lodge! And? They VERY rarely buy anything. It's more of a hastle than it's worth! OK that made sense??
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Jan 16, 2011 12:24:44 GMT -5
It seems I need to explain what I'm proposing a little better. I'm not against tele-check, and if it was in place today I would use it. From all the post etc: I came to the understanding that it would take 5 years or so before tele-check would be considered again. Also, I'm not considering online check-in as the one and only option. Online check-in would be in addition to the current check-in process (a check-in station). If the DNR would add online check-in as a 2nd option they would need to decide about the non-resident hunters. More than likely they would need to just check-in deer at a check-in station as it is today. I checked-in a doe this Dec and basically did all the work myself - told the guy the sex, time of day, weapon, etc. He wrote down all the info and handed me the deer tag (the metal one) and said have a good day. He didn't look at the deer or put the tag on. Why couldn't I just do that from home? Of course technically they are supposed to put the tag on the animal. A few days ago I did email the DNR about an online check-in option: once I get a response I will post it. I would rather see something change now instead of waiting 5 years for them to turn down tele-check again because of cost. Again, if you want the physical check in option to remain in place as well as the tele-check/on-line system, it would cost twice as much as either system alone. The paper work is collected at the check -in stations by DNR personnel (usually C.O.'s IIRC) delivered, and then someone has to collate them. This incurs payroll, gas money, etc, etc, I just don't see maintaining both options as being something the DNR would do, but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Jan 16, 2011 14:31:05 GMT -5
It seems I need to explain what I'm proposing a little better. I'm not against tele-check, and if it was in place today I would use it. From all the post etc: I came to the understanding that it would take 5 years or so before tele-check would be considered again. Also, I'm not considering online check-in as the one and only option. Online check-in would be in addition to the current check-in process (a check-in station). If the DNR would add online check-in as a 2nd option they would need to decide about the non-resident hunters. More than likely they would need to just check-in deer at a check-in station as it is today. I checked-in a doe this Dec and basically did all the work myself - told the guy the sex, time of day, weapon, etc. He wrote down all the info and handed me the deer tag (the metal one) and said have a good day. He didn't look at the deer or put the tag on. Why couldn't I just do that from home? Of course technically they are supposed to put the tag on the animal. A few days ago I did email the DNR about an online check-in option: once I get a response I will post it. I would rather see something change now instead of waiting 5 years for them to turn down tele-check again because of cost. Again, if you want the physical check in option to remain in place as well as the tele-check/on-line system, it would cost twice as much as either system alone. The paper work is collected at the check -in stations by DNR personnel (usually C.O.'s IIRC) delivered, and then someone has to collate them. This incurs payroll, gas money, etc, etc, I just don't see maintaining both options as being something the DNR would do, but I could be wrong. Look at the license sales now. Everything is on computer whether it is done at home or at a retailers. Having a computer check in would work the same, done at home or a physical check station. No books, no metal tags, just a check in number to put on your license just like Tele-check would give without an additional phone bill for the DNR to pay.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2011 15:33:39 GMT -5
Probably be a lot better to offer both a phone and on-line service. Some days may be too much for a internet server to handle? And I doubt it would be free. I know Illinois uses both, so of the DNR was interested, they could use them for data. I also know that Illinois DNR is cash poor, even to the tune of laying off a lot of COs not long ago, so if they can afford, why can't Indiana find a way.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Jan 16, 2011 17:56:57 GMT -5
In Illinois we have to give a measurement from the corner of the eye to the end of the nose on both bucks and does and an antler base measurement on bucks. That HAS to give their DNR a lot more biological aga data than our random sampling does.
|
|
|
Post by vortex100 on Jan 17, 2011 20:49:27 GMT -5
It just looks like tele-check isn't going to happen anytime soon so it would be nice to have another option until they decide to go with tele-check.
Online check-in would cost around $0 to add to the current system. The DNR just has to have their IT people put it online.
Still haven't heard back from them, and if I don't get a response soon I will contact them again.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Jan 18, 2011 21:40:21 GMT -5
Probably be a lot better to offer both a phone and on-line service. Some days may be too much for a internet server to handle? And I doubt it would be free. I know Illinois uses both, so of the DNR was interested, they could use them for data. I also know that Illinois DNR is cash poor, even to the tune of laying off a lot of COs not long ago, so if they can afford, why can't Indiana find a way. Because our DNR is ran by $$$$ cows, if they ain't makin a buck off of it, it aint worth havin!
|
|
|
Post by vortex100 on Jan 25, 2011 21:23:19 GMT -5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I finally got a response from the DNR - sounds like an auto reply.
Thank you again for contacting the Division of Fish and Wildlife. Division leadership has and continues to explore uses of the web to improve customer service and streamline process.
Thats it - it's almost like they didn't know how to respond.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Jan 26, 2011 11:51:59 GMT -5
Deertracks, sorry but they will get back to you in 5 years. LMAO! After which they will decide to add another 5 yrs.
|
|
|
Post by dsayer on Jan 26, 2011 14:51:23 GMT -5
Drive 110 miles from central Indiana to Jefferson County, leaving computer at home, stay in landowners house for 10 days, no computer access, harvest deer on different days from opening Saturday until I leave a week later, better have a 2nd option for check-in if the 48 hours requirement would still be in effect, toll free number to do it? Inquiring minds are curious. I hunt deer with my father every year in Nebraska where they are phasing out the check-in stations in favor of tele-check. As it stands now, the regular firearms season still utilizes the old system, but archery, muzleloader, and late-rifle seasons are all tele-check only (they don't have an option for online check-in). I shot a couple does during the late season and used the toll free number to call in. The whole process took about 2 minutes per deer. It was very efficient and user friendly and much better than waiting in line at the check station. I'd love for this to come to Indiana, especially if it means that I could de-bone or quarter deer in the field like I do in Colorado which would allow me to backpack in farther.
|
|
|
Post by tickman1961 on Jan 27, 2011 14:59:59 GMT -5
Drive 110 miles from central Indiana to Jefferson County, leaving computer at home, stay in landowners house for 10 days, no computer access, harvest deer on different days from opening Saturday until I leave a week later, better have a 2nd option for check-in if the 48 hours requirement would still be in effect, toll free number to do it? Inquiring minds are curious. I hunt deer with my father every year in Nebraska where they are phasing out the check-in stations in favor of tele-check. As it stands now, the regular firearms season still utilizes the old system, but archery, muzleloader, and late-rifle seasons are all tele-check only (they don't have an option for online check-in). I shot a couple does during the late season and used the toll free number to call in. The whole process took about 2 minutes per deer. It was very efficient and user friendly and much better than waiting in line at the check station. I'd love for this to come to Indiana, especially if it means that I could de-bone or quarter deer in the field like I do in Colorado which would allow me to backpack in farther. Tele-check makes too much sense to be implemented by the Indiana DNR.
|
|