Jason,

One of the reasons for the changes was specifically addressing the southern section of District 4 (the area of the state that you referred to). In looking at a county-by-county breakdown of the numbers of participants, the board recognized that the south side of the District had several counties with very few participants, and a few that had none. In looking at travel commitments, it was recognized that the current boundaries left a large gap between the areas where the wrestlers were located, making for an inefficient allocation.

Since one of the goals of the district boundaries (among others) is to try and group the state in as contiguous a manner as possible, the boundaries were shifted to avoid leaving this dead zone (as far as wrestling participants are concerned) in the middle of a district.

Regarding District 1, I think that the board members came to the same observation as you did and recognized that future changes are probably going to be required. I believe that there was a general consensus that the board needs to continue to review boundaries on a routine basis, rather that let imbalances grow unabated as in prior years.