You ask what evidence there is that Penna. Hunters want more deer then the habitat can support? That is a real hoot. All one has to do is read the posts you, Corny and Screaming man come out with to see the evidence of hunters that are out of touch with the balances of nature and demanding more deer the habitat can support long term. Even the deer have been proving you wrong and you aren't smart enough to see it.

You are correct that both the deer herd and antler less allocationshave beenincreasing since 1980, but only because the deer herd was exploding into areas of the state where there had previously been few deer, like around our city streets and housing developments. The fact is that both the antler less allocations and deer harvests have declined in the old traditional deer areas of the big woods, such as unit 2G, for over two decades now.

Here are the antler less allocation and harvest histories for the counties that make up 2G, with both expressed in units per square mile, to prove what I said above.

Data set…………………88-92.……….93-97.…………98-02.…………03-07
Antlerless license……….16.21.……….13.08.………†¦12.30.………….8.65
Deer harvests…..………..9.55.…………8.00.…⠀¦â€¦â€¦.8.53.…………..4.00

Breeding rates were not higher in when we had more deer in the habitat damaged areas, either. In those old habitat damaged areas, of the past, the breeding rates and reproductive rates are better now then ever in the past. If the breeding and reproductive rates have declined anywhere, (and I’m not saying they have), it is only because some areas of the state have totally failed to harvest enough deer and now their deer herds are starting the naturally induced downward spiral that follows having more deer then the habitat can support for too long.

The real fact is that you don’t know what you are talking about and simply don’t have a clue about deer management, their habitats or how one relates to the other.

R.S. Bodenhorn