TJD

I see two issues there.

First, as far as what happened "20 years ago", go no further than the restrictive process for getting antlerless permits the DNR had as little as 10 years ago to see how this supposed problem started. If you recall you had to apply for an antlerless tag, and then the DNR would inform you if you qualified, then you plunked down another $12 for the permit itself. Two steps. How's that for convenience? Or the good old "Hunters Choice" process? You had to apply to get a sticker to affix to your license...again for a fee...to have the privledge of being able to shoot a doe with your regular tag.It sure did not seem that the DNR wanted to make it easy for hunters to harvest does. But then suddenly...about face!...it's a "crisis" and along comes t-zones and EAB.

Second, if the oft-repeated DNR line that the increase in trophy hunting is one of the "problems" faced by deer managers, then managing the herd for quality means taking enough does, not too few. And as for farmers...yes, 30 deer will eat what 30 deer eat, regardless of sex. But: 1) farmers certainly have enough reason to shoot sufficient deer to reduce crop damage, and 2) if the herd is unbalanced and there are more does than bucks in an area, there will be more does than bucks shot.

Either way, another year of the DNR tryig to cram EAB down the throats of hunters, when all evidence is that the herd is far lower than thought, would lead to an even worse issue: loss of hunters and loss of harvest.

Bottom line is what DNR Secretary Matt Frank stated at the legislative hearings last week"

"We are listening," said Frank, responding to criticism that the DNR is arrogant and unresponsive to the public. "Simply put, we cannot manage and maintain a sustainable and healthy deer herd without the support of hunters."