.....if we don't cull the deer population big time, back to what it was 150 years ago, you can say goodbye to our forest edge and eventually most of our forests.....
I don't understand this statement.
In my mind one of the contributing factors to an increased deer population is an increase in woodlands resulting from cropland being taken out of production.
Deer mainly live in the first 100-150 meters of forest edge, so you're right in that we're increasing their habitat, especially suburban tracts cut into the woods. Deep forest few of us see, it's very dense with undergrowth and not easily navigable.
What destroys the forests though is the deer themselves in that they eat saplings and rut against younger trees (scratch the bark off them, which weakens them, opens disease vectors, and eventually kills them). Next time your in the woods (almost certainly forest edge) take a look up. You'll see what foresters call a "Cathedral" woodland. All the trees are large 60-80 year old trees, and very, very few small to moderate trees. As those older trees die off, there's no shorter trees to take their place. Ideally, a healthy forest will have trees equally spread throughout levels of maturity.
Owl_Eagle
(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
it was probably sarcasm)