Antler Restrictions

[Doc]

The "fly in the ointment" is the reporting rate percentage and how that is calculated.

Unfortunately that is the one number that needn't be guesstimated. There really doesn't have to be a "reporting rate" concocted, and that number could easily change to something just a bit shy of 100% through mandatory reporting for every tag issued (successful or not). And huge amounts of resources could be saved to boot, simply applying some minor software writing and by utilizing the power of the computers that they already have in place.

[Buckstopshere]

Doc: I do not see how any amount of software could ever take into consideration the amount of falisification that occurs.

For instance...kind of difficult to be politically correct about this one, but...what if a certain group of hunters called in, or verified online that they killed does so that the game department would think that their management goals were achieved there and so that the following year, the DMU permits would be cut back...or remain the same...allowing for a larger population.

I could dream up other scenarios, real or imagined for individuals to report their take falsely. Matter of fact, even under a perfect, Utopian scenario of 100% reporting, a lot of hunters would not know their correct DMU (some of the lines go through the woods and we need a GPS to put down the right DMU or even state (down here where I live on the Pa. border.)

According to the DEC, many hunters do not know what town they kill their deer in. They more than occassionally, write down the closest town or village...which is incorrect...not thinking that it matters...

And that's not to mention all the honest mistakes good people make.

100% in anything that pertains to man's infaliability, my old friend, is a pipe dream.

[Doc]

If people want to lie, they will lie. I'm sure they are doing it now, and you probably can't change that even if you stay with the system as it is. However, if penalties for both failure to report an falsifying reports were ratcheted up a bit, it may cause people to think twice before issuing a false report.

But anyway that is a separate issue. We now have very flawed system that makes a mockery of the "mandatory" reporting requirement. And I am simply saying that a very slight massaging of existing software could put that problem away for good. And save the DEC some resources in the process. We have computerized license issuing. We have computerized reporting. We have computerized manipulation of the data. It's all there right now. Just simply use it and there will be no more dodging the reporting responsibilities. Simple computer sorts will poop out who has or hasn't reported. And if you want computerized warnings to be sent out, that can be done too. And if you want computerized tickets to be mailed out that can be done too.