Here is a quote from an article by Marcus Schneck.

"During questioning of WMI representatives, Staback noted, “One of the basic disagreements is how much deer contribute” to poor forest health. He then asked, “Are deer a factor among many of the major cause?”
William Healy, a retired U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service biologist and one of the researchers involved in the audit, replied, “Deer are the primary factor eliminating regeneration on many sites. But, are deer the only cause? Absolutely not.”
He explained, “There are a host of problems that impact regeneration. But, we can cope with those problems if we can keep deer numbers at a reasonable level.”
The WMI representatives also would not forecast a timetable for forest recovery in the presence of reduced deer numbers.
Scott Williamson, vice president at WMI, said examples can be found of such recovery, but “to make a blanket statement ... would simply be false.”
Warning against expectations of a “short-term turnaround in forest health,” he cautioned that “the forest systems that we’re looking at are a product of history and are not going to change overnight.”
Rep. Ron Miller, R-York County, asked, “Is this a little like human health issues?” There are additional stresses on the forest, “but the deer herd is the easiest managed part of that. And, because of the other stresses, we need to reduce the deer herd even more.”
Healy replied, “I’m not sure that deer are the easiest part to manage. But, the longer you’ve had deer problems, the longer it takes to recover.”


Read more: http://www.centredaily.com/2010/03/1...#ixzz0i4oKeLan


Why aren't deer the easiest part to manage? It is the only method that costs DCNR virtually nothing,since the hunters pay for the privilege of controlling the deer. Every other method of improving regeneration costs DCNR thousands of dollars and that is why deer have been made the scape goat.

There is a comments forum at the end of the article if you would like to voice your opinion.