I made that statement to evoke some thought. Do I think it has gone too far? That depends on the definition of "has" I suppose...LOL. Yes I voted that it has not gone too far, because too far would mean that there are no huntable pops of deer left, and we all know that there indeed are huntable pops. You must go hunt them now for sure. Not every stump in the open woods will yield the same chance at taking a deer anymore. The only reason that was the case years ago is because of pressured deer running willy nilly about the countryside with a thousand rounds per hour coming at them. Those days are over. One of the reasons that pressure existed is because the majority of hunters would congregate in the mountainous areas for two days of bang 'em up hunting. Now the hunters are just as likely to hunt more urban areas as they are mountainous regions. I do not think that HR has gone too far. I do think it has gone far enough. I would not want to continue the decline further than what has transpired.
What would the ramifications be of a one year moratorium on doe hunting North of I-80? Crunch the numbers and see if we have gone too far, or really not far at all in terms of recoverable losses.