Not necessarily about the article, but talking about old does reminds me of an issue I used to have with a club I was in. Everybody always talked about hoping a big mature doe would come out this evening so they could kill one for meat. I would contest that they should be shooting a yearling (or otherwise young doe) instead. I have no scientific learning on this, just observation, but ALL the old does I would see had babies, and very often twins, and even a few would have triplets. They were better, more protective mothers, thus overall more beneficial to the herd. We had one doe that had triplets two years in a row, we called her "old flop ear", and made her off limits. She was a COW, huge doe, and for whatever reason one ear flopped. First year we saw her she had three knothead babies!!! Opening morning of bow season she walked right under me with those babies, she looked cross-eyed, crazy, and half bald! LOL Bless her heart!! Next year she would bring three babies out on a greenfield every evening (never noticed what they were). I got out of that club the next year, so who knows what happened.

To me, if you want LESS deer you should shoot the old doe. This is the reason to shoot does in general right? (Besides meat of course)

If you want MORE deer you should shoot NO does and only bucks.

It doesn't seem to me like you should ever shoot the young doe.

Jawbone, do you think, in theory at least, that its possible to grow bigger deer and not include reducing the herd as a goal?
In other words, I know why people want bigger deer, but why would one want fewer deer on their property?