Well then using that goofy analogy explain what happened between the early nineties, when 2G hunters had been harvesting more deer for several year then any time since, that the hunters could continue to sustain those relatively higher harvests but couldn’t sustain even lower harvests for a shorter time period ten years later?

The fact is that during the late nineties the harvests were increased to bring the deer numbers into balance with the habitat. But, hunters and politicians through a fit and demanded that the allocations and doe harvests be reduced. I was at a meeting where a high powered politician flat out made the statement that if the Game Commission didn’t reduce the allocations he would introduce legislation to take their regulatory powers away and they would decide how many license to issue.

As a result over the next five years, beginning in 1992, the allocations across the entire north central region of the state were cut over 18%. As I already said the deer herds got away with that only because we were having a run of mild winters and good mast years. Even then the deer populations weren’t high enough to satisfy the hunters and they still complained. So, during the next five years the allocations were cut another 5% and the deer harvests went even lower.

After ten years of lower doe harvests the deer herd should have exploded but it didn’t, in fact the buck harvests declined by over 13% during those lower doe harvest years, and before they were affected by any change in the antler restrictions. That alone is a very clear indication that the deer population was already declining as a result of harvesting fewer does.

Finally in 2000 there was once again a attempt to get the deer population back in balance with the existing habitat and that went on for three years of very modest harvest increase, though still lower then the harvests had been a little more then a decade before. It was simply too little and too late to avoid having a major deer population crash with two back to back hard winters followed by several more years of poor mast crops.

The habitat in unit 2G simply couldn’t the number of deer hunters and politicians were demanding so the deer started the process of reducing their own numbers, Then when those hard winters came along the bottom fell out and the deer herd crashed. Anyone that really understands both the deer harvest history data and the habitat the deer live in can clearly see that the deer population crashed from under harvest instead of over harvest.

That is simply how nature works and neither you, the politicians, the Game Commission or anyone else screaming and shouting can change the way nature works. We can either get smart enough to work with nature or we can continue to make those same STUPID mistakes over and over again and in even more areas until they too are ruined to where they support very few deer.

R.S. Bodenhorn