I found this quote from the plan to be quite revealing.

[QUOTE]Non-forested areas, mainly agricultural and developed lands were arbitrarily
assigned a carrying capacity of 0 because of conflicts caused by deer on these lands. Forested
land figures for each county were determined through a U.S. Forest Service inventory conducted
about every 10-12 years. County data were then applied to the deer densities established for each
size class.

During their 25 years of use, county deer density objectives were rarely achieved and often
disputed by hunters who claimed there were few or no deer where they hunted. At the end of the
20th century, Cameron County was the only county where the objective was met. Forty-five of
the remaining 61 counties – the 5 special regulation counties were not assigned objectives based
on forest characteristics – were 50% or more above objective and about half of these counties
had 2 times the objective. After decades of use, setting deer density objectives and attempting to
achieve them on a county-by-county basis was not working.
/QUOTE]

They claim the previous DMP was not working because they couldn't reach the density objectives that assigned zero habitat value to non-forested. They had to be brain dead not to realize the reason they couldn't reach their objectives was because the carrying capacity was much higher than the values they were assigning to the habitat. Also, the PGC told us how well the plan was working in numerous articles in the PGN during those 25 years, but when DCNR needed to get their forests re-certified , the plan suddenly stopped working and we had an environmental crisis on the level of global warming.