First of all,there are many trees that are shade tolerant and will grow under a mature canopy if the deer don't impact them.We have exclosures under a mature canopy that proves this to be true.The regeneration will not be as prevelant as it would if more light was let in.I NEVER SAID LIGHT WAS NOT AN IMPORTANT FACTOR.Hobblebush is a good browse species that is shade tolerant.I haven't seen a hobblebush since 1980 and now they're starting to slowly show up in exclosures.That was a very common and important browse species during the middle part of this century.Unfortunately,a herd that was too big for the habitat ate it all.

In the northern tier the habitat is extremely stressed.There is no understory in huge expanses of forest.As a result,when you cut an area,the deer flock to that cut and consume all the new growth because there isn't sufficient food in the surrounding area.That's why DCNR is forced to fence in the area the cut.You have to realize that DCNR is mandated to cut no more than 70 acres at a time.This has nothing to do with the PGC since they don't manage the state forests.The state forests are managed for timber and that money goes in to the states general fund to benefit all Pennsylvanians.Since hunters only make up 8% of the population,you can't expect the remaining 92% of the state to lose money on timber revenues in order to support our hobby.There's a right way to cut timber and just clearcutting huge tracts of land is financially and ecologically irresponsible.Again,our state forests are managed for timber to benefit everyone in the state.they aren't managed for deer and never will be.When you cut too much timber,it will turn into pole timber in about 12-15 years and the carrying capacity will plummet once again and you'll be in the same situation we're in now.Once again,the point is that when an area is cut and you have too many deer and poor habitat surrounding the cut,it only takes a few deer to destroy any regeneration,even with ample amounts of light.I have all the proof you need to see up here.

Our forests are in very poor shape.Deer are not the only cause of that but it still doesn't change the fact that the carrying capacity is much lower.You mentioned the huge herd of the 60's and 70's.Those 40 years of overbrowsing has taken it's toll.People aren't pulling this stuff out of their rear.There have been so many studies to show this is the case that too argue otherwise is futile.The facts are so obvious.Back to the deer in 2G during the 60's and 70's.Those deer were hideous.It was uncommon to see a buck much bigger than a spike and many 1.5 year olds weren't even legal to shoot becaus they were so malnurished.

It took a long time of mismanaging the deer to get us in the position we're in now.This isn't going to change overnight but there has been progress.