IdahoBeav
WKR
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2017
- Messages
- 751
For the most part, it's not the same guys getting tags every year. The 5,500± that went 3/4 and the 4,000± that went 4/4 were probably mostly in-person sales, which would mean the online system is doing a good job at giving tags to people that have not received tags in the previous few years.I don't see how that reflects on the fairness of the system.
It was a different system then, and the deer tags were not unit specific.What did the data look like before the changes? Without that this data doesn’t really mean anything.
That is a lot of speculation. However, if we take it at face value, it's still a very small % of people that were able to do it in each of the last 4 years.Certain vendors taking preferred clients, $$$$$ talks.
Tech savy people getting dozens or hundreds of spots in line so they ensure they get their tag.
As the data shows and as mentioned twice previously, very few people are getting their tag every year. The majority of the tags are going to people that have only hunted once in Idaho over the last 4 years.Hard to see how this data speaks to any of the fairness issues associated with the current “OTC” system.
That is a lot of speculation. However, if we take it at face value, it's still a very small % of people that were able to do it in each of the last 4 years.
Yes. It does show that. It does not speak to the incidents of multiple proxy purchases, people logging in on multiple devices, etc.As the data shows and as mentioned twice previously, very few people are getting their tag every year. The majority of the tags are going to people that have only hunted once in Idaho over the last 4 years.
Even so, very few people are doing this and getting a tag every year. It's mostly random allocation.Type "proxy servers multiple tickets" into google and you'll see. Its not speculation. Same thing happens with wait in line sporting events, concerts and so on events everywhere. I personally know of guys doing this.
What percentage of tickets? Do you have any hard data? I would be curious. If AZ eliminated governors tags over 1 tag per species because it does not fit the north American model, how many (what percentage) of these tags does it take to do say the same for ID?
As the data shows and as mentioned twice previously, very few people are getting their tag every year. The majority of the tags are going to people that have only hunted once in Idaho over the last 4 years.
If there are a significant number of these, they're either not that successful, or very few of them made the choice to buy tags in 3 or 4 of the last 4 years.Yes. It does show that. It does not speak to the incidents of multiple proxy purchases, people logging in on multiple devices, etc.
Even so, very few people are doing this and getting a tag every year. It's mostly random allocation.
Most that try and do not get a tag are going to feel the system is very unfair. In the last 6 years, there haven't been enough tags to give to everyone that wanted one. I would have guessed that around 50% of the tags probably went to repeat tag buyers. That was very incorrect. Instead, almost 2/3 are 1 for 4 in the last 4 years. They have spread out the tags pretty well.Most of the disagreement is probably going to be over what constitutes "fair."
Most that try and do not get a tag are going to feel the system is very unfair.