In 1999, Congress requested the National 

Park Service to conduct a study and make 

recommendations that would better conserve 

the natural, cultural, recreational, and scenic 

resources within and surrounding Curecanti 

National Recreation Area (NRA).

A summary of the results of the study and its 

recommendations are presented herein. For 

additional details and analysis, the complete 

document, known as the Final Resource 

Protection Study/Environmental Impact 

Statement (RPS/EIS), is available at locations 

described on the last page of this brochure.

No sooner than thirty days following 

distribution of the Final RPS/EIS, a Record of 

Decision will be released, which will document 

the National Park Service’s selected alternative. 

Dillon Pinnacles dominate the scene along the shore of Blue Mesa Reservoir in the heart of Curecanti National Recreation Area

SUMMARY

Final Resource Protection Study / Environmental Impact Statement

August 2008

Curecanti National Recreation Area

Colorado

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

A Report to Congress that presents the study’s 

findings and recommendations, jointly prepared 

by the National Park Service and the Bureau 

of Reclamation (the cooperating agency on the 

EIS), will then be forwarded to Congress through 

the Department of the Interior.

We appreciate the participation, comments, and 

support of the numerous agencies, organizations, 

NRA visitors, landowners, members of 

the general public, and other stakeholders 

throughout the study. This has been a rare 

opportunity to be part of conserving the valuable 

resources in the Curecanti area for future 

generations.

Superintendent

Curecanti National Recreation Area
transmission lines and related facilities; and the National 

Park Service (NPS) manages the natural and cultural 

resources, opportunities for public recreation and 

resource understanding, and associated facilities. It 

should be noted, however, that the NRA has never been 

legislatively established as a unit of the national park 

system, and has no legislated boundary. 

INTERSTATE

80

WYOMING

NEBRASKA

UTAH

NEW MEXICO

Pueblo

Colorado Springs

Denver

Grand

Junction

Montrose

Gunnison

Black Canyon of the

Gunnison National Park

CURECANTI NATIONAL

RECREATION AREA

U.S.

550

U.S.

50

COLORADO

INTERSTATE

25

INTERSTATE

70

INTERSTATE

70

INTERSTATE

76

BACKGROUND OF CURECANTI 

Curecanti National Recreation Area (NRA) is 

comprised of 41,790 acres of federal lands and 

waters, stretching approximately 40 miles along the 

Gunnison river basin in Gunnison and Montrose 

Counties, Colorado. It off ers a variety of recreational 

opportunities in a spectacular geological setting. 

The roots of Curecanti began in 1956 when Congress 

authorized the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) 

to construct the Wayne N. Aspinall Storage Unit of the 

Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), which consists 

of three dams, their reservoirs, and related facilities. 

Reclamation acquired most of the needed lands in 

the 1960s. These lands were the minimum required 

for the primary purposes of the project, with little or 

no consideration given to potential opportunities for 

land-based recreation that might be associated with an 

emerging NRA.

Today, pursuant to a 1965 Memorandum of Agreement 

(MOA), and other applicable laws and regulations, 

Reclamation manages two ongoing projects in the 

NRA and their dams, reservoirs, power plants, 

access roads, and related facilities; Western Area 

Power Administration (Western) manages electrical 

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The study is being conducted in response to a request by 

Congress (Public Law 106-76) to:

(1) assess the natural, cultural, recreational, and scenic 

resource value and character of the land within and 

surrounding Curecanti NRA (including open vistas, 

wildlife habitat, and other public benefi ts);

(2) identify practicable alternatives that protect the 

resource value and character of the land within and 

surrounding the Curecanti NRA;

(3) recommend a variety of economically feasible and 

viable tools to achieve the purposes described in 

paragraphs (1) and (2); and 

(4) estimate the costs of implementing the approaches 

recommended by the study.

NPS, with Reclamation as a cooperating agency, 

has conducted the study to identify methods and 

tools that could be used to ensure the long-term 

conservation of surrounding natural, cultural, 

recreational, and scenic resources; continued and 

expanded visitor use, enjoyment, and understanding; 

and continued and/or expanded recreational 

opportunities. The study also evaluated whether 

or not to recommend to Congress that the NRA be 

formally established with a legislated boundary, and 

what agency or agencies should be responsible for 

managing the NRA.
transmission lines and related facilities; and the National 

Park Service (NPS) manages the natural and cultural 

resources, opportunities for public recreation and 

resource understanding, and associated facilities. It 

should be noted, however, that the NRA has never been 

legislatively established as a unit of the national park 

system, and has no legislated boundary. 

BACKGROUND OF CURECANTI 

Curecanti National Recreation Area (NRA) is 

comprised of 41,790 acres of federal lands and 

waters, stretching approximately 40 miles along the 

Gunnison river basin in Gunnison and Montrose 

Counties, Colorado. It off ers a variety of recreational 

opportunities in a spectacular geological setting. 

The roots of Curecanti began in 1956 when Congress 

authorized the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) 

to construct the Wayne N. Aspinall Storage Unit of the 

Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), which consists 

of three dams, their reservoirs, and related facilities. 

Reclamation acquired most of the needed lands in 

the 1960s. These lands were the minimum required 

for the primary purposes of the project, with little or 

no consideration given to potential opportunities for 

land-based recreation that might be associated with an 

emerging NRA.

Today, pursuant to a 1965 Memorandum of Agreement 

(MOA), and other applicable laws and regulations, 

Reclamation manages two ongoing projects in the 

NRA and their dams, reservoirs, power plants, 

access roads, and related facilities; Western Area 

Power Administration (Western) manages electrical 

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The study is being conducted in response to a request by 

Congress (Public Law 106-76) to:

(1) assess the natural, cultural, recreational, and scenic 

resource value and character of the land within and 

surrounding Curecanti NRA (including open vistas, 

wildlife habitat, and other public benefi ts);

(2) identify practicable alternatives that protect the 

resource value and character of the land within and 

surrounding the Curecanti NRA;

(3) recommend a variety of economically feasible and 

viable tools to achieve the purposes described in 

paragraphs (1) and (2); and 

(4) estimate the costs of implementing the approaches 

recommended by the study.

NPS, with Reclamation as a cooperating agency, 

has conducted the study to identify methods and 

tools that could be used to ensure the long-term 

conservation of surrounding natural, cultural, 

recreational, and scenic resources; continued and 

expanded visitor use, enjoyment, and understanding; 

and continued and/or expanded recreational 

opportunities. The study also evaluated whether 

or not to recommend to Congress that the NRA be 

formally established with a legislated boundary, and 

what agency or agencies should be responsible for 

managing the NRA.
transmission lines and related facilities; and the National 

Park Service (NPS) manages the natural and cultural 

resources, opportunities for public recreation and 

resource understanding, and associated facilities. It 

should be noted, however, that the NRA has never been 

legislatively established as a unit of the national park 

system, and has no legislated boundary. 

BACKGROUND OF CURECANTI 

Curecanti National Recreation Area (NRA) is 

comprised of 41,790 acres of federal lands and 

waters, stretching approximately 40 miles along the 

Gunnison river basin in Gunnison and Montrose 

Counties, Colorado. It off ers a variety of recreational 

opportunities in a spectacular geological setting. 

The roots of Curecanti began in 1956 when Congress 

authorized the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) 

to construct the Wayne N. Aspinall Storage Unit of the 

Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), which consists 

of three dams, their reservoirs, and related facilities. 

Reclamation acquired most of the needed lands in 

the 1960s. These lands were the minimum required 

for the primary purposes of the project, with little or 

no consideration given to potential opportunities for 

land-based recreation that might be associated with an 

emerging NRA.

Today, pursuant to a 1965 Memorandum of Agreement 

(MOA), and other applicable laws and regulations, 

Reclamation manages two ongoing projects in the 

NRA and their dams, reservoirs, power plants, 

access roads, and related facilities; Western Area 

Power Administration (Western) manages electrical 

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The study is being conducted in response to a request by 

Congress (Public Law 106-76) to:

(1) assess the natural, cultural, recreational, and scenic 

resource value and character of the land within and 

surrounding Curecanti NRA (including open vistas, 

wildlife habitat, and other public benefi ts);

(2) identify practicable alternatives that protect the 

resource value and character of the land within and 

surrounding the Curecanti NRA;

(3) recommend a variety of economically feasible and 

viable tools to achieve the purposes described in 

paragraphs (1) and (2); and 

(4) estimate the costs of implementing the approaches 

recommended by the study.

NPS, with Reclamation as a cooperating agency, 

has conducted the study to identify methods and 

tools that could be used to ensure the long-term 

conservation of surrounding natural, cultural, 

recreational, and scenic resources; continued and 

expanded visitor use, enjoyment, and understanding; 

and continued and/or expanded recreational 

opportunities. The study also evaluated whether 

or not to recommend to Congress that the NRA be 

formally established with a legislated boundary, and 

what agency or agencies should be responsible for 

managing the NRA.
Alternative 1: No Action

(Continuation of Existing Conditions)

Alternative 2:

The Proposed Action

PERTAINING TO RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES:

Land within Curecanti National Recreation Area (NRA) 

would continue to be the minimum acquired by the Bureau of 

Reclamation for the Curecanti Unit, CRSP and Uncompahgre 

Project, and it would be less likely that access easements or 

additional land would be acquired, thus limiting recreational 

opportunities to the current land base. Hunting, fi shing, and other 

existing recreational activities would continue, consistent with 

NPS policies and regulations.

Land within Curecanti National Recreation Area (NRA) would 

be expanded, as 10,040 acres of other agency lands would be 

added to NRA via transfers and exchanges, and there would be 

potential to acquire access easements and/or additional land from 

willing landowners, thus providing an expanded land base for 

recreational opportunities. Hunting, fi shing, and other existing 

recreational activities would continue; however, there would be 

additional potential for expanded recreational activities in some 

areas, consistent with NPS policies and regulations.

PERTAINING TO CONSERVATION OF NATURAL, CULTURAL, AND SCENIC RESOURCES:

The natural rural character of the land, intrinsic scenic values, and 

other related resource values, are less likely to be conserved, as the 

National Park Service (NPS) would have limited resources to work 

in partnership with neighbors to acquire land interests or provide 

technical assistance on private land surrounding the NRA.

Eff orts to conserve the natural rural character of the land, intrinsic 

scenic values, and other resource values, would be enhanced 

through the cooperation of local governments and adjacent 

landowners, and the availability of tools, including acquisition of 

interests in land from willing landowners, that could be utilized 

within the proposed Conservation Opportunity Area (COA).

Conservation benefi ts, including acquisition of conservation 

easements and other conservation projects, are less likely to be 

achieved, and NPS would lack authority to expend funds on 

private lands surrounding the NRA.

There would be more opportunity to meet conservation goals, 

even if funding was not immediately available for federal 

acquisition of interests in land, as NPS would be authorized to use 

an expanded assortment of other cooperative conservation tools 

within the COA.

PERTAINING TO NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE:

National signifi cance of the NRA would not be assured. Continued 

development of adjacent private property would likely change 

the scenic and rural character of the land and related resources, 

adversely aff ecting the visitor experience.

National signifi cance of the NRA would be more assured through 

cooperative conservation eff orts within the COA.

PERTAINING TO MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS:

Confusion of jurisdictional responsibilities would continue; 

management effi ciencies would less likely be achieved; NPS 

would be cautious about investing its energy and resources in the 

NRA, since NPS serves the area per agreement with a diff erent 

agency, and its long-term presence is not assured; and the 

potential loss of a NPS presence could adversely aff ect tourism, 

and consequentially, local economies.

Jurisdictional responsibilities would be clarifi ed, providing enhanced 

management effi ciencies for all agencies involved; NPS would 

be more inclined to invest energy and resources in the NRA; a 

permanent NPS presence would be assured; and the needs of local 

governments related to the economic benefi ts of tourism in the 

Curecanti area would more likely be met.

PERTAINING TO ADVERSE AND BENEFICIAL IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT:

Due to the lack of conservation tools available to NPS for working 

cooperatively with landowners, more adverse impacts to the natural, 

cultural, recreational, and scenic resources would be expected on 

lands within and surrounding the NRA.

Due to the availability of additional conservation tools within the 

COA, fewer adverse impacts and more benefi ts to the natural, 

cultural, recreational, and scenic resources would be expected, 

making this the environmentally preferred alternative.

PERTAINING TO IMPLEMENTATION COSTS:

With a determination that the administrative boundary is unlikely 

to change, one-time costs include completion of surveys, boundary 

posting and fencing. That cost is expected to be $500,000. There 

would be no additional recurring annual costs.

One-time costs include acquiring interests in land, including 

conservation easements and fee simple ownership from willing 

landowners; associated plans and administrative costs related to 

lands and partnership programs; surveys, boundary posting and 

fencing. Due to various factors (explained in the Final RPS/EIS), 

a range of costs is estimated to be from $3,690,000 to $14,973,000. 

Recurring costs for two staff positions and related expenditures 

are estimated to be $160,000 per year.

THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE ALTERNATIVES
 	

 

 





    
 



 
  
 	


 

     




 	
 
 



 	
 

 		   


 
 
 	 	




 	 
 

 



!" #$# 

%&'$&('') (''(*+,

 
  



  




 
 
 


 


 

    

 
  

!! "# $ % 

     







-.!/ /.01

"/02/ /.01

 

	



 




  	

 



	



	


 	


  
 


3
4   2

 		



 

	
 		


 	 		



  		




	 		


 
 	 		


	


 


-.!/ /.01

 	




 	


	

		

,-.,5 /.01







 	





 
 /,26 ,2"







 



 



 


 	

7., 2  6

 

/ 3 8 2 6


	
 		


  		


	 		



   


	 

 		


 	 	
 		



 

	 		


 

	 	
 		


 		


		
! 		


				


 				


  		


0.9 2

	 		


	  


 

 




 

	












		


	 
 	

	 		




















/00/ // 26

    		


210, 3 22:/!2

"/22/ /!0 2 2:/!2

 	

9/33, ,2"

3,6 8/26 ,2"

 0 36 ,2"



  

 




 
 



0 
	

 	 	 

;
	 <$=>' 

  

; 

	 2

 ,

 ?2,@ 

0 

	 
4


 ?@ 	   

  


	 	

	 






	 

   2, 
 

 
	 



 9

  2	

 ?2	

@ 	
  	
  $>#%

"

  ,
   
 2	

 ?$>#% "/,@


 
 
	
	 	
 
 
	
 2	

 	 

 

  
A 	
 
 	
 
 

 
 

 



 
	 

  2	

 	
  $>#% "/, 
 



	
	 	
 
 
	
 0
 	   



/
 ,

B 
  	
 	  



  


 
 

	 
 
 
 

  ,	

 ( 

	  	   
	  
4  


  
A
 



	

   
  

 



5


2






; 	
 ,



  	4 3 


 5
 9


  :
 


('(< "	



	




	








 



	

9

  2	





	 
4 
 ?9	
4 
   - @

9

  3
 "







. 8
 


	

   		



	 
4 


9

  2	

 ?

  2	




 
 
 
 

@

. 8
 
 ?+

   
 .8@

 ! "##$" %& '() '%$* )+#)'%$ #)


  



3
 
 

 !	 



 

	 2

 ,



?<$=>' 

@


 


 	

	







	

 ! %'(% '() '%$* )+#)'%$ #)






land; and 140 acres of Colorado
COMMENTS ON DRAFT RPS/EIS

The Draft Resource Protection Study/Environmental 

Impact Statement was released in July 2007. It was posted 

to the NPS planning website at http://parkplanning.

nps.gov/cure, and its availability was advertised in local 

newspapers, and in letters mailed to over 700 government 

entities, organizations, landowners, and other individuals. 

The 90-day public review period ran from July 20 to 

October 22. A total of 35 letters, faxes, and Internet 

comments were received. Of these, 63% supported 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action); 26% were neutral, 

not specifying which alternative was favored; and 11% 

supported Alternative 1 (No Action). A brief summary of 

the comments on the Draft RPS/EIS appears below.

Bureau of Land Management, Colorado Division of 

Wildlife, and U.S. Forest Service are neighboring land 

management agencies. They have been briefed on 

numerous occasions throughout the study, have provided 

input into development of the Proposed Action, have 

provided written comments on the Draft RPS/EIS, and 

are all in support of Alternative 2, the Proposed Action.

Gunnison and Montrose County Commissioners and the 

City of Gunnison Council Members have expressed their 

support of the Proposed Action. The Gunnison County 

Planner is considering incorporating RPS data and 

recommendations into the component of the county’s 

comprehensive master plan that will deal with the portion 

of the county that includes the Curecanti area.

In general, landowners with whom the study team has 

met were interested in the concepts being proposed by 

the study. Some landowners expressed the sentiment 

that they appreciated the goals of the RPS, as many of 

those goals aligned with their own desires of being good 

caretakers of the land. However, some landowners would 

not want to open their property for public access (for 

example, to hikers), and many plan to remain on their 

property. Several landowners expressed the view that 

although they would be opposed to any plan that would 

infringe on private property rights, they would consider 

working cooperatively with the National Park Service in 

order to meet mutually agreed-upon conservation goals.

A more comprehensive listing of the comments and NPS 

responses to them are located in Chapter 5: Consultation 

and Coordination of the Final RPS/EIS. Also included in 

Chapter 5 are all letters from agencies and organizations 

in their entirety.

WHERE TO SEE FULL FINAL RPS/EIS

The full version of the Final Resource Protection Study/

Environmental Impact Statement is available for 

inspection on line at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/cure; 

at Curecanti’s Elk Creek Visitor Center and Marina, 102 

Elk Creek, Gunnison, CO 81230; Curecanti’s Lake Fork 

Marina in Sapinero; Montrose Public Lands Center, 2505 

South Townsend Avenue, Montrose, CO 81401; and at the 

following locations: Colorado State University Library, 

Fort Collins; Crawford Public Library; Delta Public 

Library; Gunnison County Library in Crested Butte and 

Gunnison; Hotchkiss Public Library; Leslie J. Savage 

Library, Western State College, Gunnison; Mesa County 

Library, Grand Junction; Montrose Regional Library, 

Montrose; National Park Service, 12795 West Alameda 

Parkway, Lakewood; and Paonia Public Library.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

Please contact Superintendent, Curecanti NRA, 

102 Elk Creek, Gunnison, CO 81230; Tel: (970) 641-2337.

We’re on the web at www.nps.gov/cure

NPS D-121A, August 2008