"My point was and still is that statements like that do not serve anyone well. I understand that he wasnt advocating 200 DPSM but why even use such an outrageous number?"

I think he made a very good point. If a piece of land can hold that many, a ridiculous extreme, for ANY amount of time, what are the odds it can't hold a reasonable amount of deer long term? But instead we are told statewide the deer densities must be lower than any other similar "normal state". You are talking 2 extremes. 200 dpsm....and the levels our statewide goals are leaving us with.