No state that I am aware of expresses there deer harvest in harvests per square mile. But, anyone capable of fifth grade math should be able to divide the total state deer harvest by the number of square miles of land mass in the state to figure out what the harvest per square mile was.
I do that for every WMU in the state, as well as the entire state, every year. I also do the same for other states when it is desired to compare one state to another in a fair and equal manner.

Last year’s Pennsylvania deer harvest was 335,850 so if you divide that by the 45,301.78 square miles of land, city streets and some water areas included, you get the 7.41 deer harvested per square mileas I posted.

You can do the same for any state, of other management unit, you desire provided you know the harvest and the size of the state or unit. It makes thing more comparable on an apples to apples comparison instead of expressing things in the apples to pumpkins comparison a lot of you try to do.

R.S. Bodenhorn

The simple fact that you are using total harvests instead of buck harvests makes your data totally irrelevant. If a state is allowing their herd to increase the total harvest will be much less than a state where the herd was being reduced as in PA.
The only valid comparison is to compare the buck harvest PSM.

Calling the total harvest irrelevant is just plain silly.That hypothetical state looking for an increase is either non existent or very rare. If there is indeed a state trying to grow it's herd,please tell us which state that is.

The statement above looks like an attempt at more smoke and mirrors to divert attention from the real facts[:'(]

I didn't say any state was managing for an increase in the herd, but what matters is whether the harvest reduced the herd or allowed the herd to increase. The PGC has been trying to reduce our herd since 1988, yet the herd increased to a all time record of 1.6M deer.

never mind.

He'll have all summer to sift through it, so he's ready to advise Bolgiano and Co. on their next lawsuit, like he did on their current one.

In other words, this "what if" example you gave.....

Is irelevant except to attempt to cloud the issue.

It makes thing more comparable on an apples to apples comparison instead of expressing things in the apples to pumpkins comparison a lot of you try to do.

R.S. Bodenhorn

how would you compare hunter satisfaction in Pa. to any other state right now??? Apples to skyscrapers?

The buck harvest is the basis for determining deer density in every population model and the anterless harvest is determined by the number of antlerless tags issued,rather than the DD

The reason no other state does, infact no one person for that matter,atleast anyone smarter than a 5th grader (other than you that is) does not calculate deer harvest per square mile is because it is totally useless to do so without excluding area's such as Philly. Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, York, Reading, Allentown, Lancaster, etc.,etc, etc., and other urban area's where deer hunting is not taking place. And for you to claim that PA. has a similar DD. as OH. is laughable considering the fact that 450,000 OH. deer hunters harvested around 70,000 less deer than 900,000 + PA. deer hunters did last season. Pike