Let me play devil's advocate.
Suppose the following limiting factors which could affect deer sightings, either does or bucks, are in effect statewide:
1) warmer average temperatures, which may:
a) keep deer bedded down during daylight hours while its warmer
b) boost an earlier spring green up meaning deer may travel
shorter distances in search of food during typically cooler
months
c) initiate more frequent weather fronts which suppress deer
movement I believe this to be true

2) bumper acorn crops providing more food than in average years
away from greenfields

3) higher than normal rainfall amounts which could limit or
alter deer travel patterns where flooding can occur This is true on our place

4) increased human pressure due to more hunters in the woods in
expectation of rutting behavior

IF these are indeed in effect collectively, then I have to consider that fewer deer sightings would be atypical. I would have to think that with no way to know the actual number of deer in the state, there is a reasonable explanation for fewer sightings (the limiting factors suggested above) and that there is the possibility that numbers have not been drastically reduced due to an overly aggressive doe harvest.
My point is, even though individuals have personally witnessed fewer deer, less deer sign, heard tales of hunters and or clubs taking large numbers (however you define ‘large numbers’) of does for several consecutive years, maybe the deer are there but they’re not appearing during shooting light for myriad reasons and the herd is not in a downward population trend as it might first appear.
I’m not arguing that the things people have mentioned on here are not valid; I’m only suggesting that it may be more complex than merely 'shooting too many does'.
I know this logic is riddled with holes, I’m just sayin… my two cents.