But we haven't been carrying more deer than the habitat could support for at least the last 28 years. If we had the herd would not have increased to 1.6M PS deer and it wouldn't have required over 1M tags to reduce the herd.
That is just an opinion, with no supporting facts.
The deer themselves have proven that there were more in many areas then the habitat could support, thus the reason their numbers declined even while hunters were harvesting fewer of them.
The counties that make up units 2G, 3A, 3C and 4D all had their highest antler less deer harvests between fifteen and twenty years ago while 3D had its highest harvests ever more then ten years ago. The deer population in those units seems to have been in a state of decline since those years long ago even though hunters keep harvesting fewer then they did back then.
It seems the deer are telling a different story then the one you like to tell.
But the WMUs the most development are the very WMUs that have the highest harvest rates and highest deer densities because of all the fringe habitat created by development.
Though those units have the highest populations and harvest toady it is because the professionals were smart enough years ago to keep increasing the harvests in those units as the deer populations increased, thus protecting the deer habitat and food supply.
This is the harvest history results for those most metropolitan areas of the state.
During the past fifteen years antler less harvests in the counties that make up 2A have increased 67.4% yet it is still the third highest harvest unit in the state. Unit 2B has increased 114.95 in the same time period and presently still has the highest deer harvests in the state. Unit 5C increased 115.2% over the past fifteen years and is still the second highest harvest unit in the state. Unit 5D increased 95.9% and presently ranks number seven in antler less deer harvests.
Based on the harvest history facts it certainly appears that it is much more important to harvest enough deer to protect the deer food supply instead of over protecting the deer. If you protect the deer food by harvesting as many deer as hunters can find it certainly seems that the deer numbers will stay high, maybe forever. It also appears that harvesting fewer deer does nothing more then result in having less deer food and fewer deer in the future.
That is what they deer themselves are proving. Based on the facts the deer have provided who do people think the professionals should listen to, the facts from the deer or you?
There is no question that the herd is being managed for the benefit of DCNR and the timber industry and not for the benefit of the deer or the hunters.
That is nothing more then an opinion that isn’t supported with any facts. In my opinion there is absolutely no question that your opinion is wrong.
BTW,what evidence can you provide to support your theory that we have been carrying more deer than the habitat can support?
I already did, by presenting what they deer are proving, and have been doing so for years.
R.S. Bodenhorn