Though you say the units are all either good or fair you as mistaken. There are two units that have a POOR herd health rating in that report, you linked, plus another two classified as UNCERTAIN (do to low sample size) that have reproductive data in the poor category.
As of 2008 all but one WMU was rated at being at it's goal for herd health and both 2F and 2G were rated at their goal even though breeding rates haven't increased significantly. If the herd was above the MSY carrying capacity of the habitat when the HR plan was implemented then we should have observed a state wide significant improvement in breeding rates and productivity, and the result would not have been affected by the distribution of the does that were checked ,because the increase would have occurred across the entire state and the areas with the worst breeding rates like 2G would have increased the most. Unfortunately that didn't happen and that is why,despite your predictions , the buck harvest and total harvest have not returned to their previous levels as you claimed they would.