LAST EDITED ON May-11-12 AT 06:28PM (MST)[p]I'm assuming that when you state "science" you are referring to the studied elements of wildlife ecology and conservation biology. If so, then yes 'science' supports the quota recommendations, but only partially.
The validation through 'science' includes the analysis of annual herd trends and population dynamics, as well as the analysis and modeling of collected herd data. However, the buck:doe ratios set for the state were influenced by you and I the sportsmen a while back, which were also validated as likely ecologically adequate by biologists. When you combine the analysis results with the set ratios it enables biologists to make the conclusion that our deer herds can support a higher tag quota. They do the same thing each year....we just so happen to have a lot more deer throughout the state this year.
Additionally, 'science' has shown, through multiple research efforts, that deer do follow the same migration corridors with little or no deviation each year when weather forces them to migrate. Furthermore, 'science' has shown that transition and winter range degradation, whether it be as result of human development, or as a result of fire (such as the Dunphy Hills fire back in the late 1990's - once a highly depended upon by area 6 herd), or both (such as the case of the Sierra front winter ranges, which were bladed, graded, and developed as suburbs and then burned over the past few years), do in fact result in evident decreases in herd densities.
History has shown, evident of the Marsh Creek Bench (transition zone) die off in Independence valley (which burned and a lot of deer died as an indirect result of the fire), and studies have shown, using collard deer, that muleys will go to their winter range and will parish as a result of starvation if the carrying capacity has been abruptly reduced in a significant manner. However, you are always welcome to believe what you would like, whether it is backed by facts or not.
So, as you may feel that it would be nice to "try this science in a couple of the units for a couple of years before trying it on the deer herd in the whole state," it is completely unnecessary as there is plenty of history and research that make it evident as to what does and doesn't work for deer management.
Wildlife ecology and conservation biology may not be precise or spot-on sciences, but I'll side with ball park estimates backed and supported by evidence through historic events and research results before I'll side with unsupported theories and self proclaimed mule deer management experts.