Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Notices 16889 

Transportation, Circulation, and 

Congestion—Current transportation 

options and infrastructure do not meet 

the needs of many visitors and result in 

congestion at several popular 

destinations, including sections of 

Crater Rim Drive such as Thurston Lava 

Tube (Nahuku). Volcanic events have 

led to closures of park roads and may 

continue to disrupt established travel 

patterns. The location, capacity, and 

condition of park roads, parking lots, 

trails, and other infrastructure should be 

evaluated in relation to visitor needs as 

well as resource protection goals. 

Natural Resource Preservation, 

Restoration, and Research—The park is 

home to an amazing diversity of life, 

including 54 species that are Federally 

listed as threatened or endangered. 

Invasive species are an overriding 

concern at the park—they degrade 

natural ecosystems, reduce the richness 

of flora and fauna, and threaten the 

survival of the park’s unique 

biodiversity. There is an on-going need 

for adequate staffing, funding, and 

facilities. Improving the capacity of the 

park to protect its native plants, 

animals, and natural processes requires 

innovative management. The park is 

also home to pioneering research 

studies and an active research 

community. The GMP will explore 

opportunities for the park to continue to 

expand its capacity to preserve and 

perpetuate natural resources through 

stewardship and research activities. A 

separate EIS effort was initiated in 2008 

that is specifically focused on managing 

non-native ungulates and consequent 

restoration of native ecosystems and 

cultural resources affected by ungulates. 

Cultural Resource Protection and 

Management—The park has many 

significant cultural landscapes, historic 

structures, archeological sites, 

ethnographic resources, and museum 

collections. There are also many places 

in the park that are culturally significant 

to Native Hawaiians and are used for 

ongoing traditional use. Managing these 

resources presents challenges—such as 

protection from visitor impacts, 

weathering, and vandalism, as well as 

insuring funding for preservation and 

education. Incorporating Native 

Hawaiian values and ongoing traditional 

use into future park planning will be 

addressed. 

Climate Change—Global climate 

change may potentially lead to changes 

in local weather patterns, wildfire 

frequency, distribution of plant and 

animal communities, hurricane 

frequency, sea level, and increased 

avian disease. Pro-active planning and 

management actions can help the park 

adjust to climate change, interpret 

changing conditions to the public, 

reduce the effects on park resources, 

operations and visitors, and reduce 

emissions from park operations to the 

extent feasible and possible. 

Sustainable Operations and 

Facilities—Managing a park sitting 

astride two active volcanoes presents 

many challenges. Volcanic activity has 

destroyed a number of operational and 

maintenance facilities. Today, the 

remaining facilities are scattered 

throughout the park, often in outdated 

structures that were not intended for 

these uses and may not be sustainable 

or efficient. The uncertainty of future 

volcanic activity and concerns about 

health and safety require operational 

and emergency procedures that are 

flexible and responsive to changing 

conditions. 

Partnership Development— 

Partnerships, both inside and outside 

park boundaries, have greatly expanded 

the park’s capacity to fulfill its mission 

and greatly enhance the quality of 

services provided. The park is currently 

working with private entities, various 

governmental agencies and non-profit 

organizations in local, regional, and 

landscape level conservation 

partnerships, such as the park’s 

involvement in the Three Mountain 

Alliance and their close relationship 

with Hawaiian Volcano Observatory and 

the Pacific Island Ecosystem Research 

Center. Non-profit organizations also 

provide a range of services within the 

park, including visitor guided tours and 

educational programs, and cultural and 

natural resource service projects. 

Business Relationships—Commercial 

service operators provide a range of 

visitor amenities within the park, 

including food service and lodging, 

guided tours and educational programs. 

The GMP will explore how the park can 

improve visitor experiences by 

promoting commercial services that are 

necessary and appropriate to support 

visitor needs. 

Park Boundary—Activities adjacent to 

the park’s boundaries have the potential 

to impact sensitive park resources. 

Planning for the next 15–20 years 

prompts pro-active thinking about best 

protecting the park’s fundamental 

resources and values. In addition, the 

Olaa rainforest area is managed by the 

NPS, but is not part of the official park 

boundary. The GMP will consider any 

potential for recommendations for 

boundary changes. 

Kahuku District—The park increased 

significantly in 2003 when the 116,000 

acre Kahuku area was acquired. There 

are currently no visitor facilities at 

Kahuku and highway access needs to be 

analyzed. Resource inventory and 

monitoring has begun. Planning for the 

Kahuku District is essential for 

developing a cohesive vision for the 

entire park. Also, a wilderness 

eligibility assessment for the Kahuku 

District, as required by NPS 

management policy, will be included in 

the GMP. The park currently contains 

131,542 acres of Congressionally 

designated Wilderness. A separate 

Wilderness Management Plan will be 

prepared following completion of the 

GMP update. 

Decision Process: Following the 

scoping phase and consideration of 

public concerns and other agency 

comments, a Draft EIS will be prepared 

and released for public review. 

Availability of the forthcoming Draft 

EIS/GMP will be formally announced in 

the Federal Register, as well as through 

local and regional news media, direct 

mailing to the project mailing list, and 

via the Internet. Following due 

consideration of all agency and public 

comment as may be received, a Final 

EIS will be prepared; at this time it is 

anticipated that the final proposed plan 

will be available in 2013. As a delegated 

EIS, the official responsible for the final 

decision on the proposed plan is the 

Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

Subsequently, the official responsible 

for implementation of the approved 

plan is the Superintendent, Hawaii 

Volcanoes National Park. 

Dated: February 19, 2009. 

Jonathan B. Jarvis, 

Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

[FR Doc. E9–8192 Filed 4–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 

DEPARTNENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Resource Protection Study, Record of 

Decision, Curecanti National 

Recreation Area, Colorado 

AGENCY: National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of a 

Record of Decision on the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 

for the Resource Protection Study, 

Curecanti National Recreation Area. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park 

Service (NPS) announces the 

availability of the Record of Decision for 

the Resource Protection Study, 

Curecanti National Recreation Area, 

Colorado. On December 4, 2008, the 

Regional Director, Intermountain 

Region, approved the Record of 

16890 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Notices 

Decision for the project. A report, jointly 

prepared by the National Park Service 

and the Bureau of Reclamation 

(Reclamation, the cooperating agency on 

the EIS), will be forwarded to Congress 

through the Department of the Interior. 

That Report to Congress will present the 

Resource Protection Study’s findings, 

and will recommend the 

implementation of the Preferred 

Alternative (Proposed Action) contained 

in the FEIS issued on October 3, 2008. 

Congress will then decide what action 

to take, if any. As soon as practicable 

following such congressional action, the 

National Park Service will begin to 

implement those actions. 

Alternatives Receiving Detailed Impact 

Assessment 

Alternative 1: No Action (Continuation 

of Existing Conditions) 

Under Alternative 1, the No Action 

Alternative, NPS would continue to 

manage the natural, cultural, and 

recreational resources of Curecanti 

National Recreation Area (NRA), and 

associated facilities, pursuant to 

Reclamation law, NPS law, the 1965 

Memorandum of Agreement between 

NPS and Reclamation (1965 MOA), and 

other applicable laws and regulations. 

Reclamation would continue to manage 

the three dams and reservoirs, power 

plants, access roads, and other related 

facilities, to meet the purposes of the 

Colorado River Storage Project Act 

(CRSP); would continue to manage the 

East Portal area to meet the purposes of 

the Uncompahgre Project; and would 

continue to have unrestricted access to 

their lands and land interests, water and 

water interests, and facilities; pursuant 

to Reclamation law, the 1965 MOA, and 

other applicable laws and regulations. 

There would be no significant change in 

the NRA boundary. A permanent NPS 

presence would not be assured under 

this alternative. 

Alternative 2: Proposed Action 

Under Alternative 2, the Proposed 

Action, or Preferred Alternative, NPS 

would manage the same natural, 

cultural, and recreational resources and 

facilities as Alternative 1, pursuant to 

Reclamation law, NPS law, including 

new legislation establishing the NRA 

with 10,040 acres of additional agreedupon neighboring agency lands, a 

revised MOA with Reclamation, and 

other applicable laws and regulations. 

Reclamation would manage their same 

facilities and areas of responsibility as 

Alternative 1, and would have 

unrestricted access to their lands and 

land interests, water and water interests, 

and facilities, pursuant to Reclamation 

law, the revised MOA, and other 

applicable laws and regulations. NPS 

would be authorized to work in 

partnership with private landowners 

within a Conservation Opportunity Area 

of 24,300 acres outside the NRA 

boundary, to implement a variety of 

tools, including acquiring interests in 

land from willing landowners, such as 

fee simple acquisition and conservation 

easements, which would promote the 

long-term conservation of resources. A 

permanent NPS presence would be 

assured under this alternative, which is 

also the environmentally preferred 

alternative. 

Other Alternatives Considered 

Four other alternatives pertaining to 

the proposed boundary, and various 

scenarios for different agencies to 

manage the NRA were considered. They 

were all eliminated from detailed 

impact assessment for reasons stated in 

the FEIS. 

The Record of Decision includes a 

description of the background of the 

project, a statement of the decision 

made, synopses of other alternatives 

considered, the basis for the decision, a 

finding of no impairment of park 

resources and values, a description of 

the environmentally preferable 

alternative, and an overview of public 

involvement in the decision-making 

process. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Connie Rudd, Superintendent, 

Curecanti National Recreation Area, 102 

Elk Creek, Gunnison, CO 81230; Tel: 

(970) 641–2337 ext. 220; E-mail: 

connie_rudd@nps.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of 

the Record of Decision may be obtained 

from the contact listed above or online 

at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/cure. 

Dated: December 9, 2008. 

Michael D. Snyder, 

Regional Director, Intermountain Region, 

National Park Service. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received in the Office of the Federal Register 

on April 7, 2009. 

[FR Doc. E9–8202 Filed 4–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–EX–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R6–R–2008–N0344; 60138–1265– 

6CCP–S3] 

Final Comprehensive Conservation 

Plan for Sullys Hill National Game 

Preserve, Fort Totten, ND 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce 

that our Final Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan (Plan) and Finding of 

No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the 

Sullys Hill National Game Preserve is 

available. This Final CCP describes how 

the Service intends to manage this 

refuge for the next 15 years. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the Plan may be 

obtained by writing to U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Division of Refuge 

Planning, P.O. Box 25486, Denver 

Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225; 

or by download from http://mountainprairie.fws.gov/planning. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura King, 406–644–2211, (phone); 

406–644–2661 (fax); or 

laura_king@fws.gov (e-mail). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sullys Hill 

National Game Preserve, established in 

1904, is a 1,675-acre National Wildlife 

Refuge sitting on the south shores of 

Devils Lake, about 10 miles south of the 

city of Devils Lake, North Dakota. This 

Refuge supports a unique community of 

habitats such as an oak, ash, basswood 

and aspen woodland, mixed grassed 

prairie, and some natural wetlands. 

These diverse habitats provide ‘‘edge’’ 

habitat for over 250 species of migratory 

birds, plains bison, Rocky Mountain elk, 

white-tailed deer, turkeys, and prairie 

dogs. 

The Refuge is one of only 19 

designated natural areas in North 

Dakota, of which only four are National 

Wildlife Refuges. It is also one of only 

four Refuges nationally established for 

bison conservation. 

Sullys Hill National Game Preserve 

has over 60,000 visitors annually. The 

Refuge is becoming a progressive 

regional conservation learning center, 

promoting the conservation role of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System while 

educating visitors about the functions 

and benefits of prairie wetlands and 

grasslands. Per its legislative purpose, 

there is no hunting permitted on this 

Refuge. 

The draft Plan and Environmental 

Assessment (EA) was made available to