I think, since there are only a limited number of tags given out, that subsistence hunters should be given priority, because believe it or not, many would starve if not for hunting. Why should sport hunting interfere with a family merely trying to survive? Also, if I were the dude, anyone who killed on public lands merely for a rack or head would lose hunting priveledges for life. Tough doohdoohs!
Also, if deer populations were not curtailed as much by hunting, the reduced predator populations would probably rebound, which might actually be a good thing. Predators are much better at "thinning out" the herd, genetically speaking, thus promoting better offspring. Human hunting, as casual as it is, probably only serves to weaken the herd by removing the strongest reproductive members.
I am all for hunter/gatherer living and for permaculture. Anything else seems overly inefficient, destructive and cruel.
We humans used to live by nomadic hunting/gathering, but some weak guy decided to settle down and the forests were destroyed to make way for agriculture and the meat industry, so he could sit there and create cities. Cough, cough! We can't just up and be hunter/gatherers again. The carrying capacity of the land is already full. But, if we replace agriculture and the meat industry with family permaculture farms, we would all be fed, healthier, happier, probably live longer, and the carrying capacity of the land would be maximally increased. Then maybe some of could go back to a hunter/gatehrer lifestyle without contributing to the dwindling of already strained resources.