That would be a much more effective management plan than the current one, but I can't imagine what it would cost to pull off and the red tape that it would generate.
Iowa does it. One county may allow 3000 does, the neighbor county may allow 1500 some 0 some 150. Allowed two bucks a season state wide
Ohio does it. Wisconsin does it and has for decades. It's a matter of what you grew up with, whether the hunting community (i.e., landowners-hunters-leasers) can agree or compromise, and then actually do it. It also invoves whether the majority of hunters want it or if only a few loud ones endlessly yammering about something want it and yammer at the right people.
Ohio does it in two-year cycles. I think maybe Wisconsin does the same. Other states do it, too. It's based on their mandatory deer check numbers and adjusting the season bag limits. The next two years in Smith County, Ohio, you might have a season limit of up to 4 does. "Up to" doesn't mean "have to." And then after review and such, the next two years may be the same. Or it may be three, or two or whatever. Not sure but I think maybe Arkansas does it with their 473 zones and sub-zones.
It's not difficult, even in states with a lot of counties, IF the data to be used is legitimate and scientifically trustworthy. It usually is in states where not tagging and reporting bucks and does carries a stiff penalty.
It should be matter of whether it's biologically necessary and answer the foremost question: "will this help or hurt the species?" But as we know, that usually takes a back seat in many states to politics, good ol' boy bullchit in the back rooms, and influence from "avid hunters" and specially invited friends of the department in secret meetings with state officials instead of the common man.
