The lower you decrease the deer population relative to the amount of food available the less competition you have for resources……which equates to less deer moving around in search of food…… When a county that typically checks in around 2000 does per season checks in 2900…….those extra 900 does that got killed matters ……A collective increase in doe harvest that big county wide has the potential to impact a lot of properties…..even ones that didn’t participate with the increased killing…… Even big plantation numbers arent going to stay as concentrated when hunters on every small parcel around them have a feeder set up shooting an extra 900+ does……
Bullock county is a big county. 623 square miles - almost 400,000 acres. Killing a doe per 200 acres gets you 2,000 does killed (3 dead deer per sq mi). An extra 900 deer killed is a deer per 444 acres or 1.4 additional dead deer per sq mi. Assuming that the county is populated with a deer per 10 acres or 64 deer per sq mi that would be 40,000 deer in the county. You can't tell me that killing an extra deer per 444 acres would be noticeable countywide. That "extra" is only 2.3% of the population. I would argue that only killing 7.5% of the population is not enough. Even if the population is a deer per 20 acres, thats still killing only 15% of the population.
