Deerfly,that isn't what I'm saying at all.When you have deer densities over 100 dpsm,they eat everything of value and nothing butjubk is left to grow.I can show you example after example that this is the case.

Doug,I admit when I'm wrong and this time I'm 50% wrong.
After getting more time to study the maps I partly have to agree with you.The Anderson valley is on state land up against the private land.However on the north side of 322 the state forest stops short of Anderson.So a good number of those deer are on the state land.Lack of time caused my mistake.Man that doesn't happen often.
Don't worry,after this year they'll get those numbers in check providing the adjoining land owner hasn't posted.

deerfly,the one area had a deer density of 126 dpsm.It was on the border of privateland but it's open to hunting.Most of the other deer were in a torndao area that isn't even that great of habitat.There used to be a ton of deer in that area,especially within 10 years of that tornadogoing through.You can ask germain,most of that regeneration is beech.It's not good habitat but it's better than most of the surrounding areaand it is good cover.Regardless of whether or not it's near private land,it's open to hunting and the deer don't know the difference.The point is,people have been complaining that there's no deer around here and there's plenty if you look where there's food and cover.

Germain,I was just talking to my neighbor about that area.I knew he hunted there because he killed a bear in there a few years ago.Those numbers didn't surprise him one bit.It's not all that hard to get in there but it's a tough drag out.He claims it's loaded with deer in there all the time.There's also a big clearcut not far from there.

Maybe I'll see ya there in archery Doug.