If deer density is so low in the area that you hunt that you feel it necessary, why not limit yourself to one deer? Us "alpha hunters" aren't to blame. We work hard for our deer but there aren't that many of us. There sure aren't enough to do the deed that was done in the northcentral part of the state, and it isn't the Game Commission killing all the deer. Instead of whining for a "one deer and done" policy, why not let the professionals who know what they are doing manage the deer herd?
For your information, here are the PAGC total deer harvest figures for the seven years before this one:
1998-377,489
1999-378,592
2000-301,379
2001-486,014
2002-517,529
2003-464,890
2004-409,320
Do you see a pattern? First of all, it is impossible for me to understand how anyone could possibly look at these figures and not conclude that we have reduced the population of deer. Second, when over four hundred thousand deer are killed, you can't possibly believe that us "alpha hunters" got even a large percentage of them. There simply aren't that many of us. Third, do you notice that the harvest is declining since 2002? It will keep declining until the harvest number is roughly equal to the deer production for a year, which should be enough to stabilize the population at a level the forests can support without damage.
Hunting has changed in Pennsylvania. It had to change because the deer were doing major damage to the forests. We are never going back to those huge herds of deer that were so easy to find. If you love hunting, you will keep doing it and will adapt to those changes. If you don't like hard hunting, you might as well quit buying a license. It isn't going to get a whole lot easier for you.
You do have a few options. One would be to find a better place to hunt. There are areas of the state that have too many deer and not enough hunters. Another option would be to quit hunting entirely. It wouldn't me my choice, but it might be yours.