lil hammer

going by size it definately depends on the management plan
going by number of deer anywhere agricultural fields and wooded areas are adjacent

Centaur 1

For the people who've never hunted in Florida, take note of the airboat in the third picture. The hardest part about hunting deer in Florida is the ability to get to where they live. If it's not under water the underbrush is usually too dense to walk through, not to mention the stories you hear about ranchers losing cattle due to their nostrils getting glogged with mosquitos. Yeah the last one is probably an old wives tale but the skeets are big enough to stand flat footed and "fornicate" a turkey.

Cornelius08

"Do PA WMU's correspond to counties? "

It doesnt matter when the entire area of counties on the map that comprise the wmus are in many instances double the current deer density.

cleveland5

good looking bucks!

Lanse couche couche

Dunno if I buy that Cornelius. Even if you are right about that significant of a uniform reduction, if a county was supposed to have 40-45 deer per square mile and now it is only half that, the deer density is still higher than many areas of other states that are supposed to be hot spots. And I'm not sure how the dynamics of what is/isn't happening in the WNU's would change the fact that deer population densities would remain high in areas where much of the land is privately held and less subject to state management policies. At least that seems to be the opinion of some folks who actually own land or hunt on private land.

RT1

Michigan!

ok, it's pretty good here, not #1 but worth mentioning

piles of deer in the lower penisula, especially in southwest michigan.