ORIGINAL: Cornelius08

Bigcountry, I missed this exact wording previously, and its pretty far out there, so thought I better address it.

"As to greene county, still too many deer, and it is not limited to the private ground I hunt"

Greene has far fewer than it did, far fewer than it could have and far fewer than it should.

But 1st, your contention of "too many". 1st by all pgc measurement variables, the herd is NOT too large (and your property with 100 or the property on the other end of the county with 3 have nothing to do with it. They dont micromanage remember? Its wmu wide antlerless allocations and currently the wmu is WELLunder the cc.

Pgcs own assessment shows adequate regeneration, and also herd health. They decided based on that data to "stabilize" the much smaller herd for the last 3 years and this year as well. The citizen advisory committee, although a joke, comprised of a few "eco-weineys" which threw a monkey wrench into the works STILL ended up being a consensus of STABILIZATION. Also, pgc human conflict rating for the wmu was LOW.

THEREFORE your contention too many deer in the wmu is FAR off base.

Now, why should there be more? Because we have the best habitat type in the state, and I dont believe NOWHERE IN THE STATE can have 25 dpfsm ow.or more,responsibly. I know better.

Second. We had 69 ow dpsm back in the 90's and they STILL didnt degrade the habitat to unacceptable standards,since the habitatNEVER rated poor.Also, the people around here STILL werent crying slaughter the deer.

While I'll agree we couldve used some reduction as preventative measure generally speaking, and the herd was a bit unnecessarily high, NOTHING and I mean NOTHING warranted the rediculous extreme reduction we recieved. Which despite pgcs claim of stabilization, is STILL being reduced. Thanksto higher antlerless harvest goals and higher allocations than we had while the herd was according to pgc being reduced.

1.Most hunters from the wmu dont think there are too many.
2.Most nonhunters I speak with on a daily basis dont think there are too many.
3.Despite the inappropritate allocations, evenpgc claims there arent too many deer in the wmu, and is why they are claiming to stabilize.
4.The cac believed the herd wasnt too high in the wmu. In fact of the people surveyed by the cac members the people wanted INCREASE by a HUGE margin.


Seems you, along with maybe 1% of the farmers in the wmu, who want zero deer (most farmers are currently quite content as is here) are the only ones complaining. And the farmers in question have plenty of options to address. Dmap. Red tags. And new legislation permitting 'em to shoot deer 24/7. So i fail to see reason to keep the entire wmus herd at rediculous for the wmu lows or worse, go lower.

Btw, as for your "dodging deer", it used to be, on nice evenings in late summer early fall just before dark, you could see deer every quarter mile or so in fields etc. Now you might, if lucky, see 3 to 10 the entire way across the county from Wind Ridge to Carmichaels .

As for assesements by area, all of which Im VERY familiar with, Carmichaels area, way down too many tags for too long. Garards fort area, way down tons of hunting pressure, Kirby,down same reason, Sycamore down due to ehd and tags, Wind ridge practically dead due to ehd, Kuhntown, Down Deep Valley, Down, and on and on.... ONly place Ive heard tons and tons of deer still is Aleppo! In my opinion still good huntable numbers in most, with exceptions maybe of a few where I think the herd should be allowed to rebound and I wouldnt dream of killing antlerless in those areas. Mostly, areas infar western part of Greene. Many landowners in the area have closed the land due to the devastating ehd. Others now allow no doe hunting for a couple years. From what Id seen, that extremely responsible of them!

And most of these arent public lands. They are mostly private unposted land that are willing to allow hunting with the asking. A couple public, and some posted that is hunted by friends and family of the landowners.

I see very little areas that the "plan" has missed. I know they exist. but are few and far between, and even exist in some of the absolute worst counties.

The excessive reduction may have taken lesser habitat areas of the state far lower, but most areas werent spared unnecessary excessive slaughter including this one.