This was interesting to read. It seems like there is still a lot of work to do in parts of the US as well. I'm going to look further into what Canadian regulations are. I do know that location information processing is going to be very costly to get started. My understanding is that this is one of the big reasons we don't support that yet. This would make our jobs much, much easier.

One other big problem we have is when 492 people all decide to call in at the same time, for the same incident. I've adopted a personal rule myself... If there are several others at the scene of an incident, I won't call. Without a doubt, several others either have, are or will call. The 9-1-1 centre doesn't need my call on top of them all. If the scene is sparse, I'll make the call just to ensure it isn't missed. These centres also have limited staff and become easily overwhelmed by excessive reporting.

It'* costly on both ends...the cell companies, as well as the PSAPs. To be really useful, mapping has to be added to the computer-aided dispatch system that can plot the lat/long information. Even then, the system often has to be polled again for a more accurate reading.

The problem with most callers is that they have no additional information. "I was just driving by and saw it" is the usual response. Injuries, trapped victims, how many vehicles, traffic problems, fluid leaks, etc., are unknown.

Yup, all too common. When we ask our comm centre for an update, often they have nothing because the caller drove past and didn't stop. We frequently go out only to find a broken down vehicle, sometimes nothing at all because the caller "thought" there was a problem. I don't advocate people stopping IF they don't feel safe doing so, but at least provide the most accurate information possible.

As for the CAD, our system does have mapping and can pinpoint location based on lat/long, but as you say, there is much more than this.

The one I have saved is better.