Doug, I wasnt speaking of Greene county in particular nor was I speaking of public land alone.

There is no room generally speaking for the STATEWIDE harvest to go any higher without further reducing the herd, since we have been ALREADY with our relatively low harvest due to low herd size.

If you add to the harvest wether its in Greene, or any other county, public land or private... The overall statewide deer population would decline because of it. Thats all I was saying. And I think we need that about as much as we need another a-hole. Now I wouldnt be opposed to further reduction in some of the urban areas that have the access problems and actually need it. But if responsible management were to take place.....most areas are long overdue for some herd growth, and that growth would counter, numberwise any reductions made where needed since the areas in need of increase are FAR higher than the few tiny pockets of the state that need more reduction, so basically we'd have more deer overall than we had now, with MORE being where they should be, but still less in the areas in most need of reduction.

As for "gamelands", I believe the poor hunting there is due to statewide mismanagement. Of course there, due to the extra hunting pressure, the effects of the failed plan are magnified. Though the maleffects to varying extents can readily be seen just about anywhere other than off limits or highly regulated lands. If the econuts had their way, without a doubt we would have the same pathetic stateforest and gameland low or lower deer densities on every inch of our states land.