Mr. Merlo, If I might offer a few observations to your comments. If CWA committees and board members are meeting with employees and discussing matters and they are discussing issues not necessarily reflective of CWA positions, then I would say "Houston we have a problem". I would think that before any issues would be discussed that there would be a need for a clear and decisive direction either from the committee in oversight or through some kind of consensus. It should be IMPERITIVE to inform the membership of CWA and the general hunting community of these activities. Or at the very least submit to the R&T committee/membership a position statement providing the reasoning and process the board utilized to come to a vote and have it documented for review by anyone requesting such information. That would require a record of meetings and written documentation. I am curious if there is one? Currently as you have alluded if the Board is not necessarily representing the views of CWA. If not CWA, then they need to at the very least represent the views of the hunters who they are professing to represent, CWA members or not. I feel the outreach needs to be broadened to provide more comprehensive inclusion and to receive a valid sampling of this constituency. CWA's website only has limited reach and there was no notification in the proposed agenda published in the magazine. There should be additional collaboration with the managing entities to utilize everyone's resources to obtain better feedback although it appears the feedback garnered was simply ignored. DFG's hunting license or application data base as a collaborative example. I was just provided with a fishing survey through DFG utilizing this very process. Representation through stakeholder groups should be at the forefront of the CWA's mission to see instituted. By stakeholders I mean ALL hunters who hunt public and private, not folks that are just members of CWA. Nothing wrong with throwing stuff at a wall...trouble is sometimes when you operate in a vacuum and are supported by your own confirmation biases you are prone to overlook the opinions and sound advice of others. IN addition you could just be plain old WRONG. This is where you go to see if "you the emperor" is actually wearing any clothes. Attempting to maintain a monopoly of the manner in which input is gathered interpreted and then shared is NOT the best "representative" strategy. Especially when the input and reasoning is taken from such a small segment of the CWA community as to at times render it anecdotal and for all practical purposes useless? USELESS BECAUSE THE FACT IS REDUCING THE LIMIT TO 5 ACCOMPLISHES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO ACHEIEVE YOUR ENDS. Let that sink in.......you may have identified a problem we ironically ALL acknowledge, but IMHO and a few others you are wrong headed in your attempts to address the issue on several fronts. I am sure that everyone had hopes for the CWA to function as its ideals intended. Unfortunately the "strong personalities" who have apparently grasped the leadership roles and provided the direction for CWA and the board IMHO used CWA's good name attached to it as well to run roughshod applying their own personal views and direction of how the hunting limits should be set. VERY DANAGEROUS. There has also been good work by CWA providing resources in support of the hunting community, I want to make that point clear. In reality there is a real need for such a collective voice to be offered and input provided to assure proposals and changes reflect not only the goals of CWA but the needs and desires where appropriate of the majority stakeholders (hunters). IMHO damage is being done to CWA's reputation by this blunder...so continue at your own risk and peril for something you feel passionate about or reflect on what perhaps really is the best course of action to obtain your ultimate goal which we ironically all support!. I say either start over again and see if this perhaps is correct direction to have started in the first place. Perhaps HABITAT is the answer and not limits? My comments are meant to be constructive and helpful, I hope you find them so. Hopefully the leadership, the leadership of CWA and board will read the discussions and input provided on these pages and sees a real need to improve the process and address problems. If not then perhaps new leadership might be in order. No curse words were used in the expression of my own passionate "feelings" on this matter. PS....Thanks for not returning my call the other day!