Yep,once the habitat get's stressed to the point it is in many areas,it takes far less deer to continue to impact it.In these areas,hunters will be forced to deal with alot less deer for long periods of time.It makes sense to me if we fix the problem before it becomes a problem like it did in 2G.
Does that explain why the reproductive rate in 2F is so much lower than in 2G ,yet the DD is so much higher? Does that mean that restoring the habitat in 2g is more important than the habitat in 2F. Can you cite the PGC study that accounts for the variation in reproductive rates verses regeneration rates and deer density. Or , do you only have the tired old,worn out PGC talking points