states with telecheck and internet checking?

[wtnhunt]

The check station closest to us is supposedly not going to be open this year, which may turn out to be a non issue. Hearing we are going to have an option this fall for checking deer over the internet. Seems it would make it very convenient especially for us since hunting on our property we would not have to leave to check in our deer, however it would seem it would also make it easier for poachers.

Guess it would be kind of interesting in the states that have recently gone to the telecheck system, if it promoted more hunters checking in their deer, or if there was a rise in the number of deer that were not checked, any significant variances in harvest numbers one way or the other. Anyone know it there is any kind of info out there on this? Any thoughts on these conveniences?

[jesse8953]

I have heard this is the last year for check stations in ohio. I think there will be some bow hunters not tagging there deer unless they get a big buck.Not so much at gun season, the dnr is everywhere.I think the fines for poaching should be high,might make people think about the law.

[layin on the smackdown]

We have it in IL...and you are dead on. It is convenient for hunters, but also poachers. This idea makes it so easy for people to harvest deer during gun season with any type of firearm due to the fact that no one will be inspecting the deer. Seeing as how IL only has shotgun and ML gun restrictions, i am willing to bet there have been a number of deer harvests taken with a rifle since this has been implemented. As for harvest numbers, they seem to be relatively consistent with previous years numbers ( a little lower in 08 than 07)...but once again, i don't believe the numbers to be as accurate as previous years either due to the telecheck process.

you can probably go to the IL-DNR website and look up some stats from previous years... http://www.dnr.state.il.us/index.htm

I am not sure as to why they changed it in the first place. I think that it opens up way to much room for poachers to do what they want, especially for those poachers who process their own deer. JMO

Edited June 9, 2009 by layin on the smackdown

[OHbuckeye1]

I have heard this is the last year for check stations in ohio. I think there will be some bow hunters not tagging there deer unless they get a big buck.Not so much at gun season, the dnr is everywhere.I think the fines for poaching should be high,might make people think about the law.

Poaching is allready bad enough, I hate to see this new system go into affect. I would rather keep the check stations, plus it was neat to stop by the check stations to see what was being brought in.

[woolybear]

Well we switched over here a few years back to the tele-touch system here in NY, but were never demanded by law to take a carcass through a check station either.

Myself personally believes it was much easier to fill out a tag, check a few boxes, and throw it in the mail once filled. Kinda gave one a better sence of 'my vote counts' to the overall harvest #'s, and I'm sure they'll get it.

They give us 48 hrs to register our kills here legally, but there have been a few times, tags filled out completely and all where the timeframe given didn't necessarilly fit my schedule either. Sure there's more out there who feel the same, but I believe it leads to inaccurate harvest records when they put a time constraint on your reply.

If the animals tagged propperly from field to home, they should be allowed to be submitted by seasons end.

Does it lead to poaching?? I don't think so. I've yet to hear of a poacher who's skated for having his tags filled out propperly if ya know what I'm sayin'.

[WHISKEYSWAMP]

I'm looking forward to moving this direction in Ohio simply due to it's a pain in this county to get to a check station when it's open... especially if I'd shoot a doe during the warm early season and want to get it butchered asap.

[sskybnd]

we have intrenet check in now, but most gas staions and little country stores act as check in stations too. and for the poaching yes it doesnt help when a man can buy his wife a hunting lisences and kill her 4 deer and just tag it on line as she killed them..

[HUNTINGMAN]

We went to a tellecheck system here in KY a few years back,the kdfwr says it helps them keep there numbers streight but it just seams to be an open ticket for poachers and people who dont want to check in there deer.I miss the good lod days when you had to go to a check station and seeing all of the other deer there and hearing all of the tall tales of the one that got away.

[Tominator]

I'm looking forward to moving this direction in Ohio simply due to it's a pain in this county to get to a check station when it's open... especially if I'd shoot a doe during the warm early season and want to get it butchered asap.

Ditto. Exactly the way I feel.

[wtnhunt]

Poaching is allready bad enough, I hate to see this new system go into affect. I would rather keep the check stations, plus it was neat to stop by the check stations to see what was being brought in.

Yep, was always cool to see other deer killed at the check station I used. The closest station to us was also a processor, gave the opportunity to chat with some other hunters nearby and see what kind of successes they had.

Unfortunately I am afraid that there will be those who will not properly check their deer just like someone else mentioned. I know of a few persons who have in the past had deer checked by several of their family members just so they can continue to hunt, might make that sort of thing easier.

I'm looking forward to moving this direction in Ohio simply due to it's a pain in this county to get to a check station when it's open... especially if I'd shoot a doe during the warm early season and want to get it butchered asap.

Oh it will be more convenient for us for sure. Will be kind of nice especially on those warm afternoons, that we have a lot of, to not have leave and take the trip to the check station.

[goodnottygy]

Missouri has had this system for several years, along with point restictions. It seems now, the honor system is in place. The poachers will poach, no matter what and the honest, will be honest. I have found some bucks with less than 4 points on one side dead and left. It is not right to leave game. Some had such small antlers, they could have been mistaken for a doe in poor light conditions. I like the telecheck and online check, especially when gas is so high, but it hurts the businesses that checked in deer too.

[chaseasl]

I still know several people who don't have a computer, I think we will still have check in stations but they said that if the check in stations go away, they won't check another deer in

[WHISKEYSWAMP]

I still know several people who don't have a computer, I think we will still have check in stations but they said that if the check in stations go away, they won't check another deer in

they might also be able to check in deer over the phone or at any place that sells licenses... at least that's the plan in Ohio I believe.

[Doc]

I would suspect that these systems save the game management agencies all kinds of money that can better be spent on other management activities. I can imagine that the old hand-written, mail-in tags required a small army of people to input all the info into their computers. Now with these fully automated telephone and internet systems, hunters can report their harvest data directly into electronic, database-friendly formats, speeding up results and costing fewer man-hours of agency data loading.

There have always been some start-up problems and system tweaking that can cause a bit of frustration, but each year the system gets closer to flawless.

Do these automatic reporting systems promote poaching? ......I don't see why. I would think that those who are able and willing to take deer without reporting probably always did regardless of whether or not the state tried to get them to truck their deer to a check station. Certainly there was nothing magical about mail-in reports that forced a potential poacher into reporting his/her kill.

The only thing that seems to have been lost is some of the scientific inspection of deer carcasses for age and physical condition. However, I suspect that they haven't really been doing that for many years now anyway (state biologists don't come cheap).

Doc

[fly]

I am not sure as to why they changed it in the first place. I think that it opens up way to much room for poachers to do what they want, especially for those poachers who process their own deer. JMO

Hey Smack, Doc is almost right on here. IL. did it to save money, but I disagree with the part about spending it on other management activities. Everyone knows Blago stole money allocated to the ILDNR for whatever he needed and I'm not so sure Quinn is going to be a lot better? When it comes to decision making in IL. money is the bottom line. They do try to put a management spin on every decision but the dollar will win every time over management.

I would suspect that these systems save the game management agencies all kinds of money that can better be spent on other management activities. I can imagine that the old hand-written, mail-in tags required a small army of people to input all the info into their computers. Now with these fully automated telephone and internet systems, hunters can report their harvest data directly into electronic, database-friendly formats, speeding up results and costing fewer man-hours of agency data loading.

Do these automatic reporting systems promote poaching? ......I don't see why.

Doc

Doc I can't say for sure the new system in IL. (internet check and phone check) has led to higher poaching, but I believe it has. The new system makes it easier for trophy hunters to get that trophy book deer out of season or with a gun instead of bow and still check it in "legally" so it can be entered into the books and showed off.

However, I would have to say I do prefer the phone/internet checking becuase of the convience factor.

[Mach1]

I liked the check stations because it allowed me to get some hands on experience at biologist-type work in college and I got paid for it. I worked a check station the second gun season here in IL back-to-back years and had a blast.

Initially, I was skeptical of the telecheck system we've got, but after a few years of it, it does save a lot of time for a hunter.

[Doc]

I liked the check stations because it allowed me to get some hands on experience at biologist-type work in college and I got paid for it. I worked a check station the second gun season here in IL back-to-back years and had a blast.

Initially, I was skeptical of the telecheck system we've got, but after a few years of it, it does save a lot of time for a hunter.

I don't know what all goes on in All of the states, but for NY, the luxury of having check stations manned by biologists has long-time passed. The luxury of having check stations manned by anybody has long-time passed. I have heard of local grocery stores being used for check stations in other states, but of course that doesn't get anybody any scientific herd condition info either. I suspect that it just plain isn't practical anymore to try to provide easily accessible check stations across entire states anymore. So the decision now is between mail-in reports and call-in/internet reports. One involves the state hiring a small army of data-inputters, the other automatically supplies the information from the hunters in computer ready bits and bytes. The choice is obvious, isn't it? It's not just more convenient for hunters, but makes a whole lot more sense from an efficiency standpoint within game management agencies.

Doc

[Doc]

Hey Smack, Doc is almost right on here. IL. did it to save money, but I disagree with the part about spending it on other management activities.

Well, what they do with the new found money is a feature for the sportsmen and other watchdogs to evaluate and handle with the appropriate measures. But at least the potential is there to run the departments with greater efficiency and therefore more effectiveness.

Doc I can't say for sure the new system in IL. (internet check and phone check) has led to higher poaching, but I believe it has. The new system makes it easier for trophy hunters to get that trophy book deer out of season or with a gun instead of bow and still check it in "legally" so it can be entered into the books and showed off.

I can see your point when compared to the old mandatory check station system. But I'm not sure that the check station system is still viable, practical, and even possible anymore. Check station systems are expensive to set up and man if you are going to have an adequate number of them spread across a state. I don't know how many states are still able to use a compulsory check station approach to harvest reporting procedures, but I suspect that there aren't very many of them left anymore......if any. Many states have gone to mail-in reports which have no more poacher-discouraging features than telephone and internet reporting.

Doc

[wtnhunt]

I don't know what all goes on in All of the states, but for NY, the luxury of having check stations manned by biologists has long-time passed. The luxury of having check stations manned by anybody has long-time passed. I have heard of local grocery stores being used for check stations in other states, but of course that doesn't get anybody any scientific herd condition info either. I suspect that it just plain isn't practical anymore to try to provide easily accessible check stations across entire states anymore. So the decision now is between mail-in reports and call-in/internet reports. One involves the state hiring a small army of data-inputters, the other automatically supplies the information from the hunters in computer ready bits and bytes. The choice is obvious, isn't it? It's not just more convenient for hunters, but makes a whole lot more sense from an efficiency standpoint within game management agencies.

Doc

In all the years I have been hunting here, there have been very few times that I have seen any state officials at any checking stations. Most checking stations here are/were gas stations or processors, and unless it was a processor where the deer was being left those folks for the most part would not verify your kill by physically looking at it. However you did have to get your permanent kill tag at the check in station and that stayed with your deer to the freezer.

We do not have biologists aging deer at check stations here, they do however go off the harvest data for the most part in their planning for upcoming seasons. It is important in my opinion for them to make the best effort they can to get it right. Inaccurate reporting of harvest, and a potential increase in number of folks who never check in deer will only add to problems for the state in trying to accurately manage the herd. Telecheck and internet checking will make it more convenient for those of us who are honest, but will also make it easier for those who are not honest.

Kind of off topic a little, but it is kind of funny that this state does generate reports and give their opinions on age classes of bucks(guess they do some sampling?), this state's biologists in writing suggested in their handbook a few years back that we have a better age class than some trophy states(cough cough Kentucky was named), which is insane since of what was reported here over or around 50 percent of the bucks killed in most counties in this state were 1.5 year olds.

[fly]

Yea the days of manned check stations are history in IL. and many other states and will not be back. I suppose in time all states will abandon manned check stations.

I can see myself sitting at the campfire in 10-20 years with my kids telling stories of how I used to have my deer checked in at the check stations, have my deer aged, and receiving the infamous IL. deer pin. Displaying your deer pin on your hat during hunting season used to be a big deal. I'll never forget seeing some of the old timers in the small town restaurants having their orange hats covered with pins. As a kid I was so envious. You can still pick up a pin at certain locations, but it's just not the same.

[Rhino]

I just wish we'd come out of the stone age and have some sort of mandatory reporting system. Telecheck was tried about 5 or 6 years ago on a voluntary basis and the numbers only showed about 1% of licensed hunters reported their kills. The 2nd year they tried it the state had a draw for a gun for participants reporting their harvest but that didn't help the numbers reporting.

State biologist get data from DMAP participants, which is also voluntary and Wildlife Management Areas. Under DMAP we submit weight, date of harvest, and antler measurement data for bucks and weight, date of harvest, and lactation for does along with jawbones on each deer for the biologist to age. According to the state though DMAP participants account for ~10% of the state's deer kill. The vast majority of DMAP participants are on their own management plan so I suspect buck harvest by age class are suspect if used to determine statewide averages of bucks killed by age class. Many wildlife management areas have check stations so those harvest numbers can't be off but even some of them have special buck antler criteria harvest rules exceeding the state's minimum harvest rules.

Edited June 12, 2009 by Rhino

[Doc]

I just wish we'd come out of the stone age and have some sort of mandatory reporting system. Telecheck was tried about 5 or 6 years ago on a voluntary basis and the numbers only showed about 1% of licensed hunters reported their kills. The 2nd year they tried it the state had a draw for a gun for participants reporting their harvest but that didn't help the numbers reporting.

State biologist get data from DMAP participants, which is also voluntary and Wildlife Management Areas. Under DMAP we submit weight, date of harvest, and antler measurement data for bucks and weight, date of harvest, and lactation for does along with jawbones on each deer for the biologist to age. According to the state though DMAP participants account for ~10% of the state's deer kill. The vast majority of DMAP participants are on their own management plan so I suspect buck harvest by age class are suspect if used to determine statewide averages of bucks killed by age class. Many wildlife management areas have check stations so those harvest numbers can't be off but even some of them have special buck antler criteria harvest rules exceeding the state's minimum harvest rules.

There is a fix for non-compliance in harvest reports, but it may be a bit harsh.

All you have to do is to require that hunters report the results of all tags issued ......... successful or unsuccessful, within 1 week of the close of all deer seasons in the state. If you have electronic and/or computer issuance of all tags, and electronic and/or computer harvest reports, a simple database comparison would show who was not complying with the law. The beauty is that the whole process would be free of manpower expenditures. The penalties for non compliance could be whatever was deemed effective. Just the knowledge that your non-compliance was automatically being flagged would most likely get hunters to obey the law. That is one feature that neither the mail-in reports nor the check stations could ever achieve. One tag issued ...... one tag reported. Pretty simple eh?

Now you could pretty this all up as much as you want by perhaps having an automated mailing go out warning that a hunter is in non-compliance and reminding him of the penalties. That way if there was some problem in reporting, a hunter would have a second chance to manually mail in or phone in a report (sometimes computers screw up).

You want data?........ask for it with the reports. You can get whatever you want other than physical items from the deer (such as jawbones, etc.)

Even with full-blown check station implementation, there is probably a good chance that deer taken on landowner's land wind up in the freezer without ever visiting the check stations. And then there are always the harvested deer in the back of pickup trucks that go flying by the check stations without even slowing down. So there is nothing magical about check stations when it comes to report accuracy. But a "one tag issued - one tag reported" system eliminates the question of how many are reporting and who are they.

Doc