Protect

HYRUM

Cache County
Fathom Restoration
41° 36′ 59″ N
111° 51′ 40″ WHYRUM RESERVOIR
Donate to Protect Hyrum
Utah's wildlife division surveyed this reservoir in 2023 and published the result. Nine fish in a hundred were something other than a Utah sucker. Every figure on this page is quoted from the record it appears in.
91%Of the 2023 gillnet catch, by number, was one species
2Structures on one dam record. The dike is longer than the dam
1974The year anything last measured what leaves this dam
3Documented drownings between 2014 and 2023, in two different places
475Acre feet this reservoir gained between two surveys, which is not possible
Live from the Little Bear
Two live gauges, which is one more than the last four pages in this series managed. The flow card is the inflow above the reservoir, because nothing has measured what leaves this dam since March 1974.
contacting federal services
Water in the reservoirNRCS
reading the daily storage record
Of capacityReclamation
against the 2018 surveyed 18,221 acre feet
The river coming inUSGS
reading the inflow gauge at Paradise
Forecast over the waterNWS
contacting the National Weather Service
About  ·  01

Filled before it was approved

A 1935 relief project that stored water four months before the President signed off on it, built as two structures rather than one, and surveyed twice with results that do not behave.

Hyrum Dam was authorised under the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 and paid for by the Public Works Administration in August 1933 . Then the dates go out of order.

DateWhat happened
March 1934Construction begins
1 April 1935Closure. The reservoir starts filling
July 1935First water delivered to farms
August 1935Construction finished
November 1935Presidential approval of the project
The dam was built, filled and irrigating for four months before the project was formally approved. That is not an error in the record. It is what Depression era emergency construction looked like: relief money moved first and the Reclamation law paperwork caught up afterwards. All five dates come off one Reclamation page .

The whole thing went from an empty hole to delivering irrigation water in a single season. Closure on 1 April, water on the fields in July.

What it was for, in Reclamation's own sentence: the project "stores and diverts water from the Little Bear River to furnish supplemental water supplies to 6,800 acres of privately owned and cultivated project lands" . Note supplemental, and note already cultivated. This was not built to open new ground. It was built to cover a late season shortfall on farms that were already there.

The contract went to J. A. Terteling and Sons on a bid of 337,221 dollars . That is the dam only, excluding the canals, the pumping plant, land and engineering. No total project cost was found in any Reclamation document, and the project history that would carry it is a scanned PDF with no readable text.

The dam inventory returns two records under the identifier UT10123 . They are not duplicates.

Hyrum DamHyrum Dike
IdentifierUT10123UT10123S001
Height116 ft18 ft
Crest length540 ft850 ft

The dike is longer than the dam and a sixth of its height. It closes a saddle on the rim about 433 metres east, where the reservoir would otherwise spill out of its basin.

Reclamation counts it too. Its list of project features reads "Hyrum Dam, Dike, Reservoir, and Spillway, Hyrum Feeder Canal, Hyrum-Mendon Canal, Wellsville Canal, Wellsville Canal Pumping Plant, and appurtenant structures" . Dam and Dike, named separately, in that order.

And neither dam inventory record is called "Hyrum Reservoir." They are filed as Hyrum Dam and Hyrum Dike, with the reservoir name appearing only in the other names field. A query for the plain name finds nothing.

Reclamation has surveyed the bottom of this reservoir twice and published both results . The numbers do not move the way anyone expects.

SurveyCapacity at elevation 4,672.5Change
194618,685 acre feetthe published design figure
200617,746 acre feetdown 939, over sixty years
201818,221 acre feetup 475
A reservoir cannot gain capacity. Sediment only accumulates. So the 475 acre foot increase between 2006 and 2018 is not water storage appearing out of nowhere; it is a difference between two survey methods, or two surveyed extents, or two ways of computing the area and capacity relationship. Reclamation's report presents the comparison and does not explain it , and this page does not guess.

All three numbers are Reclamation's own. If you want one current figure it is 18,221 acre feet from the 2018 survey, and the 18,685 that Reclamation and the dam inventory both still publish is the original design capacity.

Note what the surveyors were working with. The 2018 survey was run on 29 and 30 October with the water surface between 4,651.77 and 4,652.03 feet, about twenty feet below the reference elevation . So Reclamation measured a drawn down reservoir and extrapolated up to full pool, which is ordinary practice and is why the report's tables run in tenth of a foot steps from 4,600 to 4,673 feet. The report publishes no sediment volume and no sedimentation rate, so this page gives neither.

No agency source publishes a maximum depth or a mean depth for Hyrum Reservoir. Not Reclamation, not the dam inventory, not the wildlife division's survey, not the state park. The one document that would obviously carry it, the bathymetric survey, does not state it as a figure .

What can honestly be said instead. The dam's hydraulic height is 82 feet, agreed exactly by Reclamation and the dam inventory . That is the depth of water the structure impounds at the dam, so it is a hard upper bound on the deepest point. The bathymetric survey's own tables start at elevation 4,600 feet, which against the 4,672.5 reference implies roughly 72 feet at the deepest surveyed point .

Dividing capacity by surface area gives a mean depth of 39 to 42 feet depending on which pair of published figures you use. That is this page's arithmetic, not a measurement anyone took, and it is not attributed to Reclamation.

Surface area splits four ways too. Reclamation publishes 480 acres , its own 2018 survey measured 460.4 , and the hydrography polygon computes to about 432 . These are a design maximum, a measured surface and a cartographic polygon, so they are not really in conflict, but no single number covers all three.

Science  ·  02

The hinge of a river's pollution plan

This reservoir is the line that divides the Little Bear River's phosphorus plan in two, and the reach below it needs more than four times the cut the reach above it does.

The Little Bear River carries a total maximum daily load for total phosphorus and hydromodification, and its geography is defined by this reservoir .

SegmentLengthPhosphorus cut required
East Fork to Hyrum Reservoir6.8 miles2.4 kg a day
Hyrum Reservoir to Cutler Reservoir28.1 miles13 kg a day above Cutler

The impairment finding, verbatim: the segments "did not fully support aquatic life and cold water fishery designated uses due to high TP concentrations and hydromodification" . The standard is 0.05 milligrams a litre, and compliance means not exceeding it more than 25 percent of the time.

Read the split and the valley shows up in the arithmetic. The 6.8 miles above this reservoir, draining canyon country, need a 2.4 kilogram a day cut. The 28.1 miles below it, running across the floor of Cache Valley through farmed and settled land, account for the rest. Hyrum sits at the hinge between a comparatively clean upper watershed and a heavily loaded lower one, and it is at the top of the agricultural reach rather than the bottom of it.

And there is a rare piece of good news here. Verbatim: "UDEQ removed the upper 6.8 miles of the Little Bear River from its 2004 303(d) list for TP" . The reach feeding this reservoir was cleaned up enough to come off the impaired list. What is not established is Hyrum Reservoir's own listing status. The plan describes the reservoir as a boundary and a reference point, not as an impaired water in its own right, and no source read says whether the reservoir itself is listed. This page says neither that it is nor that it is not.

Utah's water quality rule holds five Cache County waters. Hyrum reads 2A, 3A, 4: frequent primary contact, cold water game fish, agriculture .

WaterClasses
Hyrum Reservoir2A, 3A, 4Swimming tier
Porcupine Reservoir2B, 3A, 4A tier lower for recreation, twelve miles away
Newton ReservoirAlso in the table, no page here yet
A lead this page started with did not survive. The state's harmful algal bloom page carries a list of monitored waters, and it was worth checking whether Hyrum was on it. It is not. The list holds twenty five waters, it was read twice verbatim and came back identical both times, and every sample date on it falls in 2018 . It is an archived season, not a current roster, and its advisories table reads, in full: "None. N/A. N/A."

What Hyrum does have is its own monitoring page, and it is cleaner than the assumption. The state runs recreational sampling here for both harmful algal blooms and E. coli, at the swim beach and day use area . The 25 June 2025 update reads, verbatim: "E. coli counts were measured below recreational thresholds and our monitoring team did not see any visible signs of a harmful algal bloom." The season closed on 1 November 2025.

This reservoir sits in the Bear River system, in hydrologic unit 16010203 , reaching the Bear by way of the Little Bear and Cutler Reservoir.

No fish consumption advisory names this water, and that was checked against both of Utah's two lists, which do not agree with each other. The health department carries twelve waters from a 2022 mercury analysis ; the environmental department carries roughly fifty water and species entries dated 4/23/18 . Hyrum is on neither. The only Cache County water on the longer list is Porcupine, for brown trout.

The shape in the header is traced from the Fathom print artwork, checked against the federal outline .

MeasureTracedFederalGap
Width against length0.83410.86023.04%
Share of its bounding box0.3670.3601.9%
Area, matched on length426.0 acres431.5 acres1.3% under
Area, matched on width453.1 acres431.5 acres5.0% over
The self check is clean. Adding up the federal polygon by hand gives 1.7463 square kilometres against the 1.748 the dataset publishes, agreement to about one tenth of one percent. So the arithmetic is sound and the three percent aspect gap is a real difference between two drawings of the same lake.

Long axis 1.48 miles, width 1.27. This is a broad, blunt reservoir, and the shape is the drowned lower end of a valley rather than a canyon.

Storage comes from soil conservation service station 10107000:UT:BOR, daily since 1 October 1970 . It serves daily, semimonthly and monthly, and daily is the only one flagged not derived, so it is the only one that is observed rather than computed. That is what the card reads.

And there is a live flow card, which the last four pages in this series could not manage. USGS 10105900, Little Bear River at Paradise, draining 182 square miles, continuous since October 1992 and reporting today .

Read that card correctly, because it is not what you would assume. Paradise is upstream. That gauge measures water going into the reservoir, not water coming out of it. Nothing measures what leaves this dam. The outlet gauge, USGS 10107500 below the dam, published daily discharge from October 1942 and stopped on 1 March 1974 . Fifty two years without a measurement of the release.

The water survey also once measured the reservoir itself, at a site sharing the storage station's number. That record ran from 31 October 1965 to 30 September 1980 and stopped .

The percentage card needs a stated denominator and this page states it. It divides by 18,221 acre feet, the 2018 surveyed capacity . Dividing by the published design figure of 18,685 instead would move the number by about seven tenths of a percentage point. Elevation is worth the same caution: Reclamation gives a crest of 4,680 feet and a reference elevation of 4,672.5, the hydrography dataset carries 4,664 and the gauge station sits at 4,660. Those are four different surfaces, not four answers to one question.

Recreation  ·  03

Where everything is

Eight places, two of which are separate structures on the same dam record, and two of which are gauges that stopped decades ago.

The whole reservoir
Midpoint of the USGS National Hydrography Dataset water body extent, derived rather than published
Eight places, two of which are separate structures on the same dam record, and two of which are dead gauges.

Hyrum State Park sits on the north shore . The reservoir underneath it is a 1935 Public Works Administration irrigation asset that still delivers to three canals at three elevations, one of them needing a pumping plant .

The state park and the dam are different places, and the difference matters. The park has a supervised day use beach on the north shore. The east side of the dam is a separate area, and news coverage of a 2018 drowning there describes it as a restricted area where about forty teenagers had gathered to jump from a feature called the Big Toe . A reader who conflates the two is reading about the wrong place. The hazards section below keeps them apart.

One agency source could not be read and the failure is worth naming. The state parks fee sub page for this park served content for a golf course in a different part of Utah entirely. That is the second time in three builds that the state parks sub page routing has done this, so no fee figure from that path appears here.

Hyrum Reservoir is not open to underwater spearfishing. That is double sourced and safe: it is absent from the rule and absent from the guidebook's page 19 list .

But the two sources do not agree with each other, and both cite the same rule. The rule lists forty two waters, lettered (a) to (pp). The guidebook prints eight named waters plus a Uinta Mountains grouping of seventeen high lakes, which comes to twenty five. Seventeen waters named in the rule do not appear in the guidebook, including Deer Creek, Echo, Rockport, Pineview, Starvation and Lake Powell.

The guidebook page cites the rule by number as its authority. The guidebook is the agency's own current publication; the forty two water list reaches this page through a law school library reproduction, because Utah's rules site returns errors for the rule text. Either the reproduction is of a superseded version, or the guidebook prints a curated subset. This page picks neither. None of it changes the answer for Hyrum, which is on neither.

The only Cache County water open to spearfishing is Porcupine Reservoir, and it appears on both lists . Twelve miles away, and the answer to the only question a diver in this valley is going to ask.

One statewide allowance does apply here and it needs reading carefully. The guidebook permits underwater spearfishing for common carp and Utah chub at any water open to fishing . It does not name Utah sucker, which is the species that actually dominates this reservoir. This page does not claim the allowance covers it.

No SCUBA or diving rule specific to this water was found in any source. The zoned waters rule has eighteen sections and none of them is Hyrum . That is an absence, not a permission and not a prohibition.

Fishing  ·  04

The division measured it, and wrote down what it found

Six species, four of them near zero, one of them 91 percent of the catch, and a management note about introducing something new to deal with it.

Utah sucker

The story of this reservoir. In the division's 2023 survey it was 91.0 percent of the gillnet catch by number and 94.6 percent by weight . 97 percent of those caught were of quality length or better and 17 percent were trophy length, at a mean relative weight of 99.1, essentially the reference standard. These fish are not struggling.

91% of the gillnet catch

Largemouth bass

The counterweight, and the one genuinely good angling finding in the report. Mean relative weight 107.3, above standard, and multiple fish in the preferred length category "observed for the first time" . The catch rate is not solid: 12.0 fish an hour with a standard error of 12.0, from ten minutes of shocking.

Condition above standard

Rainbow trout

Stocked to quota and not surviving. The division writes "Rainbow Trout do not appear to be well-supported in the reservoir" . Found only in the stock length category, mean relative weight 79.8 against a standard of 100, and a length distribution statistically shifted since 2012 at P = 0.030. Drawn thin for that reason.

Not well supported

Brown trout

Caught, and barely. The size metrics in the report read 67, 67, 67 across three categories, which is what two fish out of three looks like, and the division says plainly that "sample sizes were low" . This page prints no brown trout size figures, because there is nothing behind them.

Too few to measure

Yellow perch

Once one of the three species that defined this water. In 2023 its relative abundance and biomass had decreased to at or near zero . It is still legal to use dead yellow perch as bait here, which is one of only eighteen waters in Utah where that is true .

Near zero

Bluegill

Targeted in the survey, caught along the shoreline, and part of the same collapse: its abundance and biomass are in the group the division reports as decreased to at or near zero . Mean length 3.9 inches. No relative weight was computed for it.

Near zero

Every page in this series tries to read the wildlife division's own fishery report for the water. For four lakes running it did not exist, or could not be found. Here it does, it can, and it was read in full .

Eight overnight gillnets on 18 May 2023 and a shoreline electrofishing run on 9 May. The sentence that defines this page, verbatim:

"The fish community has shifted over time from being dominated largely by Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout, and Yellow Perch to a less diverse fish community with" largemouth bass and Utah sucker having important roles .

The numbers behind that sentence are stark. Utah sucker were 91.0 percent of the gillnet catch by number and 94.6 percent by weight. Roughly nine fish in a hundred, across eight overnight nets, were something other than a sucker. Meanwhile the relative abundance of bluegill, brown trout, rainbow trout and yellow perch all "decreased to at or near zero", and their biomass fell by a range the division gives as 81.1 to 100.0 percent .

The upper bound of that range is one hundred percent, which means at least one of those four species registered a biomass of zero. The report does not say which one.

The division flags its own caveat and this page carries it: sampling was to be repeated "to ensure the high-water year observed in 2023 did not skew results" . The 2024 follow up could not be found, and neither could 2022. The 2023 report benchmarks against gillnet sampling in 2012 and electrofishing in 2007, so a survey series exists going back at least eighteen years and this is the one instalment that could be read.

The report ends with two numbered management actions. The first, verbatim and complete :

"Sampling will be conducted again in 2024 to ensure the high-water year observed in 2023 did not skew results. These two years of data will be used to guide aggressive management actions (e.g., novel species introduction) in the future with the primary objective of controlling the Utah Sucker population."

A state fishery agency writing that it may introduce a novel species to control an existing one is a significant thing to put in a public document. It is hedged, and the hedge is preserved above word for word: will be used to guide, in the future. Nothing here says a decision has been made.

The second action is candour of a different kind: "Evaluate stocking efforts. Rainbow Trout do not appear to be well-supported in the reservoir. The increase in littoral, warmwater species suggests that the thermal and trophic dynamics may have shifted within the reservoir."

Read that against the stocking line and it lands harder. The same report states "Stocking quotas are being met and maintained" . The division records rainbow trout going in on schedule, and the fish it catches are thin, small, and statistically shifted downward since 2012. The fish are going in and they are not growing. The stocking database shows 5,580 rainbow trout in February 2026 and 648 more in March .

"Thermal and trophic dynamics may have shifted" is the division raising, in a fishery document, the possibility that the reservoir itself has changed. It is speculative in the source and it stays speculative here. But it is the sentence that ties this section to the phosphorus plan above it.

There is no Hyrum Reservoir entry in the fishing guidebook. The word Hyrum appears exactly once in the whole document, and it is not a water heading . The statewide rules govern this reservoir entirely.

That single appearance is on the bait list, verbatim:

"Dead yellow perch may be used as bait only in these waters: Big Sand Wash, Deer Creek, Echo, Fish Lake, Gunnison, Hyrum, Johnson, Jordanelle, Mantua, Mill Meadow, Newton, Pineview, Red Fleet, Rockport, Starvation, Utah Lake, Willard Bay and Yuba reservoirs."

Eighteen waters in the state, and this is one of them. Eleven of the others already have pages here: Deer Creek, Echo, Fish Lake, Jordanelle, Pineview, Red Fleet, Rockport, Starvation, Utah Lake, Willard Bay and Yuba.

The entry immediately before Hyrum's in the same rule is Bear Lake's, for dead Bonneville cisco, which is the only other water specific bait exception in the guidebook.

The list was checked four ways, including a separately issued question phrased so that "no" was the easy answer, and it survives all four in the same word order. Blue Ribbon status is unresolved: the division states a count of designated waters and does not print the list.

Recreation  ·  05

What to watch for

Three drownings in nine years, in two distinct places, and only one of the three supports the sentence people write about it.

At least three separate drowning deaths at Hyrum Reservoir are documented in press between 2014 and 2023. They did not happen in the same place, and telling them apart is the most useful thing this section can do.

DateWhereHow located
9 July 2014Southwest section of the reservoir, swimming without a life jacket about twenty feet outNot stated
25 May 2018The Big Toe, east side of the dam, after jumping from the cliffBystanders saw him go under; the recovery method is not stated
25 to 26 June 2023Under the day use beach dock at the state park, about eight feet downDivers, stated explicitly by two outlets
Only one of these three supports the sentence "found by divers", and it is the 2023 one. Two independent accounts say the state dive team located and recovered him, about eight feet under the beach dock, roughly nineteen and a half hours after he was last seen .

The 2014 search had a dive team AND three vessels with side scan sonar in the water, and no account says which found him . So this page does not write "found by sonar" and does not write "found by divers" for that one. It says what the record says: both were searching, and the reporting does not distinguish them.

The 2018 death was at the dam, not the beach. Coverage describes the east side of the dam as a restricted area where roughly forty teenagers had gathered to jump from a feature known as the Big Toe . That is not the state park swimming beach, and conflating them is both inaccurate and unfair to the park.

The 2023 death happened under the Hyrum Day Beach Dock at Hyrum State Park, on the authority of the outlet that names the dock .

And here is how it was reported. One outlet's web address for the story reads cache-county-sheriffs-office-looking-for-missing-boy-near-hyrum-dam , and a headline elsewhere put it at Hyrum Dam too. The beach is not at the dam. They are a mile apart at opposite ends of the water.

The dam, the dike, the reservoir, the state park and the town all carry the same name, and a page assembled from headlines would place a child's death at the wrong end of the reservoir. This page places it at the beach, and says why.

What was not found. No boating fatality, no capsizing, no ice incident, no vehicle in the water, and no incident of any kind on the Little Bear River above or below the reservoir. Those are searches that returned nothing, not searches that were skipped. The publishable form is "no incident found in searchable press", never "none has occurred." The local paper of record for Cache Valley rate limited every attempt to read it, and it would very likely be the most detailed account of all three.

Nobody publishes a depth for this reservoir. The nearest thing to a public statement about how deep the swimming water gets comes from the 2014 drowning coverage, which describes the search area as ranging from fifteen to thirty feet deep .

That is a news description of a search area, not a survey. It is here because it is the only figure of its kind on the record and because it is directly relevant to someone standing on that shoreline. The teenager who died there in 2014 had swum about twenty feet out, without a life jacket . Fifteen feet of water begins very close to shore in a reservoir with a mean depth around forty feet.

The state does sample this water for both algae and bacteria, at the swim beach and the day use area, and the last published result was clean . Monitoring runs roughly June to November. That is a real, current, agency programme on the exact stretch of shoreline people swim from.

Two teams searched in 2014. Nine years later, two outlets finally named who found him.

Fathom Restoration is a Utah 501(c)(3) that runs volunteer dive cleanups and is built to pull what does not belong out of Utah water, statewide.

Donate to Protect Hyrum

Every figure on this page is quoted from the source named beside it.

FATHOM RESTORATION
Six things on this page are narrower than what is usually written about Hyrum. The 116 foot height belongs to the dam and not to the dike, which is 18 feet and longer. The reservoir's capacity is given here as the 2018 surveyed 18,221 acre feet rather than the widely published design figure of 18,685, and the gain between the 2006 and 2018 surveys is stated as unexplained rather than smoothed over. No agency publishes a depth for this water, so the 82 foot hydraulic height is presented as a dam dimension and an upper bound rather than as a lake depth. The flow card reads an inflow gauge above the reservoir, not a release below it, because nothing has measured the release since 1974. For the July 2014 drowning this page does not say whether divers or sonar found him, because a dive team and three sonar vessels were both searching and no account distinguishes them. And the June 2023 death happened at the state park day use beach, not at the dam, whatever the headlines say. This is a reference for the public and is not a navigation chart.