"That is only a testament to having the harvests as closely balanced to the habitat as the professionals have been able to keep it in resent years and in some parts of the state, like yours, ever since the deer populations first started to increase. "

Winterkill hasnt been a problem in Pa EVER. In extreme years, northern states like Pa, minnesota, NewYork, etc. are gonna experience SOME losses. Ours has never been an issue. That includes the years of very highest herd estimates.

"Come up here sometime and can show you old pictures of lots and lots of dead deer and bleached bones following the winters back in the days from before annual doe season."

We had wellover amillion deer. How many of those have to die tonatural mortality before it is no longer acceptable and normal natuaral mortality?? THere are always weak deer, diseased deer and injured deer that die lingering deaths. There are also normal losses especially during an overly harsh year despite herd health. You are also in the harshest environment and habitat in the state and it STILL isnt usually a problem, so what does that say about the other 90+ percent of the state?

"Back then the old time Game Wardens up here piled up dead deer by the dozens to the hundreds in nearly every stream bottom. All because hunters didn’t think they should kill does so they could have more deer the next year. It works exactly the opposite though when you don’t harvest enough deer. "

I think the "old time" wardens were probably great fellas, but those old timers also like to spin yarns and drink too much. No disrespect meant, thats just the way it is often. Such episodes as you speak have never been realized across the majority of this state, and thats a fact. Can it occur in a very isolated incident? Perhaps. And perhaps an area of such poor habitat and such a rediculous deer density (that would allow that many dead in one area) WAS indeed in need of reduction. Some areas needed it of course. Others didnt. Others needed some and got more than needed by far... Blanket reduction statewide was in no way warranted by an isolated incident during a terrible winter in one area many DECADES ago.

"Deer populations and habitat are not the two separate issues you seem to think they are. Deer eat habitat and if the habitat does exist the deer don’t eat. If deer don’t eat they die."

Having read enough of my posts, you know that I know deer and habitat are entertwined. To suggest I think otherwise is a meaningless petty jab at me and attempt to discredit based on absolutely nothing.

"Haven’t you ever learned or even heard about the affects of nature on populations?"

Of course, dont be silly. Ive never said deer numbers can be limitless.AndIve neversaid range quality isnt a factor. The basics of saying too many deer isnt good, especially through winter on marginal habitat only goes so far however. It says exactly NOTHING about how many are actually too many. And that is where our acceptance of the basic principals part ways.What IS to many??I don't see ANY evidence at all that pgc has pointed to that suggest we HAVE to have the exact numbers of deer in each wmu that we currently have. NONE. Throw in the fact that some are supposedly being stabilized yet the allocation simply in no way will allow it and we are WELL past supporting an arguement with: overpopulation of deer = winterkill.

Major tweaking needs to be done. Wmus size shrinking and numbers increasingwould be a HUGE start.