I agree DougE

What we have to remember is this is area specific and what happens in your area isn't necessarily what happens in someone else's area. I personally have deer sightings daily where I live but I do know the numbers are drastically down. Now that is not arguing pro's or con's for this area. Some areas were and still are overrun with deer, other areas where deer were few are now fewer....it was a measure that had to be done and now that it is done we as hunters need to take the necessary steps to either have a regrowth in an area that needs deer and that may mean buying doe tags and not using them. In other areas that may mean getting multiple tags and filling them. It is now not up to the PGC and I firmly they don't have a clue however the PGC did not shoot the animals, hunters did so who can you blame. I blame fellow hunters for being greedy. Yes, the PGC gave us the means but did we police ourselves as a community? No we did not. I have however policed myself. I filled my tag in 2001 were I also shot one doe. In 2002 I did not shoot a deer, buck or doe even tho I had both tags and ample opportunity for taking both a buck and a doe but chose not to as I didn't see the buck I wanted nor did I "feel" like shooting a doe. In 2003 I again, did not shoot a buck by choice because of size restraints on myself and I did not purchase a doe tag. In 2004 I shot a buck but did not purchase a doe tag, in 2005, same thing, tug a buck and did not purchase a doe tag. My prime hunting area is seeing a good buck to doe ratio and I'm seeing good antler growth. As the doe population may regain it's numbers I will again shoot a doe, or two if the herd needs it and a tag is available.

Again, this is only true to me and the area I hunt. Gone are the days that deer are behind every trees. The hunt is now on versus the kill of good ole days. Deer numbers are down in many areas and perhaps the deer are gone in others. It's now up to you to do what's right.