No they didn’t need to harvest more antler less deer in unit 2G to control the herd after the harsh winters of 2003 and 2004. It just took that long for reality to catch up the management model becasue we have to work with recruitment from three year averages.
That is not a true or accurate statement. After those two winters it still required an antlerlesss harvest of 2.35 doe PSM to keep the herd stable, which means the herd recruited over 2.35 fawns PSM. That recruitment rate is what is to be expected from an OW herd of less than 10 DPSM.
No they didn’t need to harvest more antler less deer in unit 2G to control the herd after the harsh winters of 2003 and 2004. It just took that long for reality to catch up the management model becasue we have to work with recruitment from three year averages.
Of course the habitat in 2G could have supported a lot more deer after 2003 and 2004. You forget that the herd is being managed below the MSY carrying capacity of the habitat, which means the habitat could support twice as many deer.It also means that the current habitat could support a herd that produced a harvest of almost 5 antlerless deer PSM for 15 years ,during which we had the most severe winter in recent history and the herd not only survived but increased.
The facts simply do not support your biased and misguided interpretation of the data. The harvests are controlling the herd just as they did in the past. If the harvests in 2G would be less than recruitment the herd would increase just as it has in the past. But as long as the harvests equal or exceed recruitment the herd will not increase even if the habitat improves.