The story headlined “Hermosa protection bill clears panel” (Herald, Sept. 19) described the changes made to the bill before its passage through a congressional committee, and some of the reactions from stakeholders who played a role in developing the proposal that became the Hermosa Creek Watershed Protection Act of 2014.

The Hermosa Creek Workgroup (a diverse group of local stakeholders) worked for years to chart a path forward for managing the Hermosa Creek watershed, and I was proud to participate in the process on behalf of Trout Unlimited. The working group operated on a consensus basis: Only suggestions that gained unanimous support from the group were included in the proposal that became H.R. 1839. As a result, the Hermosa Creek Watershed Protection Act enjoyed strong bipartisan support from its Colorado sponsors, Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Cortez, and Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo. I, and a number of other stakeholders, made multiple trips to visit members of the committee, and other members in the House and Senate, to explain the bill and ask for feedback. We received positive responses, and we offered to work with Congress on any issues that might arise. The bill was widely seen as noncontroversial and a model of collaboration.

The revisions made to the bill two days before the committee vote complicated all of that, and raised a number of questions about whether the original consensus was still being honored. We, at Trout Unlimited, have outstanding questions and concerns about the changes made to the bill that passed through committee, and we know that some of our working group partners do too. We sincerely hope that as the bill continues to move through the legislative process it will be true to the original stakeholder proposal and regain the enthusiastic support it had enjoyed from Trout Unlimited and our fellow stakeholders.

Ty Churchwell

Durango