As I've said before, living here, I have absolutely no complaints about the deer hunting. There may not be a lot of B&C bucks relative to days of yore either, but I'm not sure 190 or 200 inch bucks are are a worthy enough goal to cut opportunity. If you want a 160-170" buck and hunt hard and smart, you can get one. Many areas do seem to get pounded hard, yet there are gaps between those areas and pockets here and there where you can go and not run into other hunters. If you want a 200" buck, there a few of them as well, but most of them will not be found off a ridge with a spotting scope or binos. I believe that if I muster the dedication and put the time and effort into it, I will kill a 200"+ buck. Its a matter of time and I don't have the illusion that I am even half the deer hunter most of you are.
I was talking with a friend the other day. He said while guiding some late elk hunters last winter, they sat and observed a couple of hours one afternoon. He said that they saw at least 30 bucks with a 30" plus spread. Some of them had unbelievable mass and character. While migratory bucks, where he was at indicates that they were all region G bucks. That was a couple of hours, one afternoon's observation.
As stated in other threads, deer adapt. Older, smarter deer adapt better. Hunters who want those deer will need to adapt as well if they want to kill them. The numbers are down, and in some sections of G it is no doubt worse than in others, but I am dumbfounded when I hear how bad the hunting is in G. By all means, go where it is better and hunt. As I stated in another thread positing the question, where would I hunt mule deer if I could pick anywhere? Right here at home. As Brian alluded, it is some of the most nasty, rugged, beautiful country in the world. I think all the naysayers (resident and non resident alike) should look to Nevada, Arizona, Colorado...