[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66488-66490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-29502]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Notice of Availability of the Draft Site Progress Report to the 
World Heritage Committee, Yellowstone National Park

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Decision adopted by the 27th Session of the 
World Heritage Committee (Document: WHC-03/27.COM/7A.12) accepted by 
the United States Government, the National Park Service (NPS) announces 
the publication for comment of a Draft Site Progress Report to the 
World Heritage Committee for Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming and 
Montana.

[[Page 66489]]


DATES: There will be a 30-day public review period for comments on this 
document. Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2003.

ADDRESSES: The Draft Site Report is included in the supplementary 
information section of this notice. Copies are also available by 
writing to Suzanne Lewis, Superintendent, Yellowstone National Park, 
P.O. Box 168, Yellowstone National Park, WY 82190-0168; by telephoning 
307-344-2002; by sending an e-mail message to [email protected]; or by picking up a copy in person at the park's 
headquarters in Mammoth Hot Springs, Wyoming, 82190. The document is 
also posted on the park's Web site at http://www.nps.gov/yell/publications/worldheritage/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Lewis, Superintendent, 
Yellowstone National Park, P.O. Box 168, Yellowstone National Park, WY 
82190-0168, or by calling 307-344-2002.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. The World Heritage Committee Decision

    In 1995, the World Heritage Committee, with the agreement of the 
United States, placed Yellowstone National Park, a designated World 
Heritage site, on its List of World Heritage in Danger in response to 
specific threats it identified to the outstanding universal value of 
the park. At its 27th Session in July 2003, the Committee decided to 
remove the park from the Danger List. The decision (27 COM 7A.12) is 
conveyed below:

    The World Heritage Committee,
    1. Notes the detailed report by the State Party provided on 
April 17, 2003;
    2. Urges the State Party to continue to report on Yellowstone's 
snowmobile phase-out and other efforts to ensure that winter travel 
facilities respect the protection of the Park, its visitors, and its 
wildlife;
    3. Recommends that the State Party continue its efforts in 
ensuring the McLaren Mine tailings are not contaminating the 
property;
    4. Recognizes the progress made in addressing all the key issues 
that led to Danger Listing of the property in 1995 and considers 
that the reasons for retaining the property on this List no longer 
exist;
    5. Congratulates the State Party for the considerable efforts 
and suggests to use this as a model case for promoting success 
stories of the World Heritage Convention and for international co-
operation with other States Parties facing similar problems in World 
Heritage properties;
    6. Decides to remove the property from the List of World 
Heritage in Danger.
    7. Invites the State Party:
    (a) to continue its commitment to address the issues that have 
concerned the Committee in the past;
    (b) to provide to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2004, 
existing recovery plans setting out targets and indicators for the 6 
remaining long-term management issues (mining activities outside the 
park, threats to bison, threats to cutthroat trout, water quality 
issues, road impacts, visitor use impacts);
    (c) to continue to report to the Committee on the condition of 
the original threats and the progress made towards resolving these 
issues until such time that the Committee decides that the reports 
are no longer needed. These reports shall include public input, 
including--but not limited to--independent experts, NGOs, and other 
key stakeholders.

B. The NPS's Draft Site Report

    In accordance with the Committee's request included in its decision 
to remove the park from the Danger List, the NPS has prepared a Site 
Report to continue to provide information to the World Heritage 
Committee on the original threats and the progress made towards 
resolving these issues. The Site Report provides a synopsis of the 
current status of the six specific threats outlined in 7(b) of the 
Committee's decision. The full text of the draft Site Report is as 
follows.

Yellowstone National Park Site Progress Report to the World Heritage 
Committee, October 2003

Introduction

    The World Heritage Committee (WHC) named Yellowstone National 
Park as a World Heritage Site in Danger on December 5, 1995. In its 
report, the committee cited specific threats and dangers that were 
already affecting, were beginning to affect, or had potential to 
seriously derogate the outstanding universal value for which 
Yellowstone National Park was established as the nation's first 
national park. At the Paris meeting in June 2003, the WHC recognized 
that significant progress at Yellowstone had been made to 
effectively address the issues that caused the park to be listed, 
and removed the park from the list.
    In removing the park from the list of troubled sites, the WHC 
recognized this progress, but also acknowledged that more work 
needed to be done on each of these issues. They also acknowledged 
the park's problems were complex and had developed over a long 
period of time, and they were not going to be resolved easily or 
quickly.
    This report is an additional status report on the progress 
Yellowstone National Park has made on the 1995 threats and dangers 
topics listed by the World Heritage Committee.

Mining Activities

    Threat in 1995: The New World Mine was a major Crown Butte 
Mines, Inc. proposal to reopen an older mining area on patented and 
U.S. Forest Service lands to new gold and silver harvest. The site 
was adjacent to the Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness area (Gallatin 
National Forest) and Yellowstone National Park and was perceived to 
be a major threat to the resources of both areas.
    Outcome: The U.S. Government and Crown Butte Mines, Inc. signed 
an agreement in 1996 to refrain from mining these lands, and the 
Congress appropriated $65 million for the acquisition of lands and 
interests, including cleanup of toxic overburden and tailings left 
over from a century of previous mining activity.
    Status: The new mining proposal was shelved and most of the 
property was transferred to public domain. Cleanup of toxic 
materials from past mining started in 2000 and is expected to take 
seven years, but post-project maintenance will be funded in 
perpetuity. The McLaren tailings were left out of the clean up 
agreement and while the tailings (which are outside Yellowstone) 
have stabilized and water quality inside the park has improved, the 
park continues to work with its state and federal neighbors to have 
the tailings removed and the site restored.

Threats to Bison

    Threat in 1995: Some of Yellowstone's bison are infected with 
Brucella abortus, the agent that causes the disease Brucellosis, and 
bison occasionally roam outside park boundaries. These bison may 
potentially transmit brucella to livestock grazing outside the park, 
which could, in turn, jeopardize the ``Brucellosis Free'' status of 
bordering states. Accordingly, the states view the presence of 
brucella in park wildlife as a significant economic threat to the 
livestock industry. Sometimes when animals migrate out of the park 
they are lethally removed, especially when wildlife population 
numbers are high and the winters are severe.
    Outcome: In 2000, Yellowstone National Park, State of Montana, 
U.S. Forest Service, and USDA Plant and Animal Health Inspection 
Service cosigned a joint bison management plan that agreed to 
maintain wildlife populations and manage the risk of transmission 
from bison to cattle within the State of Montana. It is a long-term 
plan that should manage risks currently, and set the stage for 
future discussions about eradication of the disease. It is also an 
incremental plan that becomes more wildlife-friendly and lowers 
transmission risk to cattle with each incremental success.
    Status: This carefully crafted consensus-based plan has been 
serially and successfully implemented for three years, and while not 
universally supported, many believe it addresses the major issues 
regarding the risk of brucellosis transmission from wildlife to 
livestock. While those actions are being implemented, discussions 
and research are currently underway to consider ways to eventually 
eliminate brucellosis from wildlife in the Greater Yellowstone Area 
while maintaining wild and free-ranging wildlife herds. For example, 
planning for bison vaccination and the development of a remote 
delivery system is underway, and the agencies are actively 
discussing a quarantine system external to the park to make bison 
available for other suitable western areas, and to help reduce bison 
deaths at the boundary.

Threats to Cutthroat Trout

    Threats in 1995: In 1994, voracious, predatory, non-native lake 
trout and exotic

[[Page 66490]]

trout whirling disease were discovered in Yellowstone Lake 
threatening the existence of the rare, endemic Yellowstone cutthroat 
trout, plus 42 other native birds and mammals that depend on 
cutthroats for their own survival. It could also potentially destroy 
a sport fishery that had a $36 million annual value.
    Outcome: Experts on both fish species concluded that the risk of 
functional extinction of the native trout was real and substantial, 
but that no technology exists to eradicate lake trout from the lake 
nor treat or control the trout disease. In the near future, the best 
that could be hoped for was long-term suppression of lake trout, 
through the deployment of ``industrial strength gillnets,'' to 
restore the declining cutthroat trout population. This was 
implemented by NPS beginning in 1995 targeting the estimated 7,000 
reproducing adult lake trout extant that year. In addition, a no-
limit, no-live-release regulation for lake trout with sport anglers 
was also put into effect and continues to date. Considerable 
research and monitoring continues on the whirling disease dilemma.
    Status: Gillnet fishing effort has increased each year and has 
resulted in the destruction of approximately 56,000 adult and 
juvenile lake trout. Catch-per-unit-effort declined in 2002, and 
again in 2003, and for the first time gave biologists hope 
exploitation was beginning to affect the population. Sport angling 
for lake trout has been actively promoted and the angler catch has 
represented a helpful 20 percent of the total harvest. Research 
continues to seek tools for combating whirling disease.

Water Quality Issues

    Threats in 1995: Yellowstone National Park hosts almost five 
million visitor use days annually. Old, outdated waste treatment 
plants, lift stations, and underground lines, and older single wall 
fuel tanks were causing an unacceptable level of accidental 
overflows, ruptures, and spills affecting soils, ground and surface 
waters degrading localized wild lands. In 1995, the failing Norris 
wastewater treatment plant was closed after recommendations of the 
U.S. Public Health Service.
    Outcome: All of the park's fuel storage tanks have been replaced 
with new double-walled liquid tanks or replaced with more 
environmentally friendly propane gas tanks. Congress appropriated 
monies to replace the Old Faithful, Madison, and Norris sewage 
treatment plants and those projects are underway or completed. Older 
or problematic lift stations, lines, grease traps have been replaced 
at many locations in the park. Yellowstone is a leader in 
sustainability through its ``Greening of Yellowstone'' program, 
which is identifying ways to accomplish its work at less cost and 
with fewer environmental impacts. A regional compost facility was 
opened in 2003, for example, and is tangible evidence of the 
effectiveness of the ``Greening'' initiative. In addition, the use 
of biodiesel and ethanol has been an increasing part of park 
transportation, which has a positive benefit on both air and water.
    Status: Yellowstone has made excellent progress addressing 
threats to water quality and believes that scheduled programs are in 
place and will continue to resolve the smaller scale projects 
remaining to be upgraded.

Road Impacts

    Threats in 1995: Yellowstone's road system was never designed 
for the volume, size, and weight of vehicles that travel through the 
park today. The park maintains 466 miles of roads of which 310 are 
paved and considered primary roads for the public. The remaining 156 
miles are paved or gravel secondary roads for service and/or light 
public use. The condition of the road system in 1995 was considered 
deplorable.
    Outcome: Yellowstone has an integrated, methodical and long-term 
program to improve the condition of the park's roads and lessen 
unsafe conditions and unsatisfactory experiences for visitors and 
prevention of resource degradation. An annual funded program of 
complete road bed and/or surface replacement is expected to continue 
through 2017.
    Status: Much has been accomplished upgrading the existing road 
system since 1995, but it is a slow process because of the short 
construction season and the reality that reconstruction must be 
reasonably compatible with summer visitors. As noted above, the 
current program will be carried out annually through the year 2017, 
which should largely correct the structural deficiencies. In 2003, 
Yellowstone issued its Business Plan; its statement of operational 
needs for the next five years. In that plan, deficiencies in road 
cyclical maintenance are articulated and would keep those new roads 
in top, non-deteriorating condition. All federal programs, such as 
road maintenance, are subject to federal appropriations.

Visitor Use Impacts

    Threats in 1995: Increasing visitor pressures on the natural and 
cultural resources of the park have been of concern to managers for 
many years. More recently, the quality of a visitor's Yellowstone 
experience in terms of sights, sounds and smells has also been 
extensively debated. Concerns have been raised most strongly 
regarding winter use in the park, but the crowds of summer are also 
a concern to many people. The numbers of visitors in the park, 
whether summer or winter, is a contentious subject with the U.S. 
public.
    Outcome: The completion of an EIS on a new winter use management 
plan and a Record of Decision in 2000, called for protecting visitor 
safety and enjoyment, air quality, wildlife, and the natural quiet 
of Yellowstone by phasing out snowmobile use over a three year 
period, and replacing them with non-polluting, mass transit snow 
coaches. The decision was challenged in federal court. A subsequent 
lawsuit settlement stipulated the NPS would prepare a supplemental 
EIS (SEIS) analyzing the snowmobile ban and various alternatives to 
the ban. The draft SEIS was released to the public in 2002 and 
generated over 350,000 public comments. The final SEIS was released 
in February 2003, and a Record of Decision signed on March 25, 2003, 
which approved the new winter use plan. The NPS decision allows for 
continued snowmobile use under strict limitations, establishing 
daily use limits, requiring the use of the cleaner and quieter, 4-
stroke engines, and requiring snowmobile parties to be guided.
    Status: The NPS believes the decision addresses winter use 
related issues and the park's goals of protecting park resources, 
protecting employee and visitor health and safety, and improving the 
quality of the visitor experience. Litigation has been initiated 
regarding the Record of Decision and new management plan but the 
park intends to implement the plan in December 2003. Summer, fall 
and spring visitation has been consistently below the high level 
experienced in 1995. The park has focused on development of 
partnerships that have encouraged use of alternate fuels for 
transportation and facilities. These partnerships will help the park 
and communities foster a region-wide approach to providing visitors 
and voluntary alternative modes of transportation.

C. Public Comment Solicitation

    Persons wishing to comment may do so by any one of several methods. 
They may mail comments to Suzanne Lewis, Superintendent, Yellowstone 
National Park, P.O. Box 168, Yellowstone National Park, WY 82190-0168. 
They also may comment via e-mail to [email protected] 
(include name and return address in the e-mail message). Finally, they 
may hand-deliver comments to park headquarters in Mammoth Hot Springs, 
Wyoming, 82190.
    The NPS practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular 
business hours. Individual respondents may request we withhold their 
home address from the record, which we will honor to the extent 
allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would 
withhold from the record a respondent's identify, as allowable by law. 
If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state 
this prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we will not 
consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

A. Durand Jones,
Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. 03-29502 Filed 11-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-FR-P