Carbon Canal

With the exception of Helper, which was established to support trains making the climb over Soldier Summit, these communities depended on agriculture for basic subsistence.

The ditches proved generally sufficient to serve the needs of the limited settler population until 1883, when the Denver & Rio Grande Western (D&RGW) Railroad was completed through Utah.

The arrival of the railroad and mining industries saw a concurrent increase in the general settler population of the area as the economy grew sufficiently to allow for a community of supporting commercial enterprises.

Most settlers not directly involved in the mining and railroading industries as laborers at least supplemented their household economy with agricultural pursuits if not relying entirely upon them.

By January 1908, the Emery County Progress newspaper reported that work on the canal was “well under way” by the firm of Snow, Waterman and Williams of Spanish Fork, Utah.

[4] The newspaper noted that numerous construction camps had been established along the proposed route of the canal and 100 men and 60 livestock teams were on-site.

Farmers in the area then constructed a network of smaller ditches to carry water from the canal to their agricultural lands, including fields south of the Price River.

The company was specifically organized to develop water storage facilities in the mountains northwest of Price, at the site of present-day Scofield Reservoir.

[6] On June 25, 1917, the partially completed dam collapsed, releasing 11,000 acre-feet of water downstream and causing an estimated $1 million in flood damage throughout the drainage.

Lacking deep financial reserves, the canal company applied for a loan from the state land board (part of the present-day Department of Natural Resources) to complete much needed repairs.

[7] Additional work to be conducted under the loan included “tearing out the sluice gate at what is known as Sand wash” and replacing it with a series of dykes and iron pipes.

It appears, however, that such oversight and adherence to a plan not of their making did not sit well with the board of the canal company, despite their signing off on the requirement in the loan agreement.

[9] The dispute went so far as to result in Bacon withholding “the last payroll for work done” until the state land board had resolved the issue and provided him with written direction to approve the expenditure.

By early November, the entire original flume at Drunkard’s Wash had been demolished and the earthen embankment upon which the new concrete-lined canal would rest had been constructed.

Ultimately, the newspaper stated, the canal company board would accept the repair plan outlined by Bacon and the loan requirement that all work be approved by him.

[10] Two weeks later, on November 25, 1926, the News Advocate reported that water had been turned into the Drunkard’s Wash section of the canal and initial indications were that the work completed there was satisfactory.

[12] A bonding group associated with the canal company paid Utah Savings and Trust the sum of $18,000, clearing the way for the $51,000 loan from the state land board.

[13] The loan reportedly brought the total debt owed to the land board by the canal company to $118,000 (the equivalent of approximately $1.65 million in 2017).

[13] The work, which included cleaning out the entire canal channel, was essentially complete by April 30, 1928, when water was turned into the newly built flumes.

Across the state, low crop yields, coupled with weak markets, led many water users to default on their payments to canal companies.

[16] Despite the challenges, the canal company soldiered on, attempting in 1937 to raise money through an additional assessment on its water users to complete what was referred to as “the Miller Creek flume project.” [17] The project was expected to cost $6,000, but the contribution of labor by the Soil Conservation Service (the modern predecessor to the Natural Resources Conservation Service) reduced the anticipated cost to users to approximately half that amount.

By the late 1920s, the dam at Scofield was beginning to fail, threatening a catastrophic flood and damage or destruction of extensive mining operations, the D&RGW railroad, and other facilities.

The potential loss or temporary shut-down of the mines and railroad created an unacceptable risk to the U.S. war effort at home, prompting the federal government to get involved.

The complicated web of water rights to the existing reservoir and Price River watershed created numerous challenges to addressing the issues as the Scofield Dam.

The situation ultimately prompted then-President Franklin Roosevelt to authorize construction of a new Scofield Dam project on June 24, 1943 under the provisions of the Water Conservation and Utilization Act of 1939.

[6] On April 1, 1949, the Carbon Water Conservancy District, which was formed in 1943 and which signed a repayment contract with the BOR for $216,000, assumed responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the Scofield Dam.

Much of the litigation centered around the proposed Gooseberry Project and the potential diversion of water from the Price River drainage to Sanpete County.

But to many, its trenches and dugways, its flumes and diversions, are a constant reminder of tremendous effort of the settlers of the early 1900s to bring water to the dry lands of the area and sustain an agricultural way of life for generations to come.

These remains will stand as a reminder to future generations of the efforts of early pioneers to harness the water of the Price River and create an agricultural industry in their Carbon County settlements.