It was reduced, and some areas did NOT need it to be reduced. Just like the argument from the ones who claim that blanket regulations and liberal doe days led to a decline in some areas. The same could be said for those of us who need it and now can't apply it. I've killed 9 deer this year, and need to kill that many more. We cut back on the doe killing about three years ago. We were killing 1 doe per 50-60 acres. We backed off to a doe per 100-120. Our average body weights on all age classes are beginning to drop, fawn recruitment is decreasing, and food plots are eaten slap to bear ground. I'm not alone. That's happening in a lot of areas. The deer processors I have talked to said they are just as busy as any other year, and one says he's seeing more deer, and they are looking poorer than ever. That is NOT a sign of a declining and suffering herd. It is not the state's fault. Sure we take hunter observations, feedback, and opinions seriously, but we have to apply what the data shows us too. We have to walk a fine line between public desires and science. They have to mesh together the best way they can to benefit the user groups and the resource. Deer are not declining everywhere. Sure, they are down in some areas, but they're up in others.