Protect

MANTUA

Box Elder County
Fathom Restoration
41° 30′ 20″ N
111° 55′ 57″ WMANTUA RESERVOIR
Donate to Protect Mantua
A local health department posted a danger advisory for this reservoir in May 2026 and the state page for the same water still shows an all clear from June 2024. Every figure on this page is quoted from the record it appears in.
DangerThe bloom advisory level the local health department posted for this water in May 2026
2024The last time the state page for this reservoir was updated
1963The year the only gauge ever placed on this water stopped
31%Of the reservoir's phosphorus load from the state fish hatchery beside it
8Fish species in one agency survey. The longest evidenced list in this series
One live card, and it is the weather
No soil conservation service storage station exists for this reservoir and the only stream gauge ever placed on it stopped in 1963. The advisory card is deliberately static, because the two state sources disagree and neither publishes a feed.
contacting federal services
Bloom advisoryDisputed
check first
The Bear River Health Department posted "Mantua Reservoir: Danger Advisory" on 27 May 2026, and three news outlets reported a danger advisory on 8 and 9 July 2026. Utah's environmental department page for this reservoir, retrieved 14 August 2026, displayed no current advisory and had not been updated since 19 June 2024. This page cannot tell you which is current. Ask the health department.
Water in the reservoirNo station
no feed
There is no soil conservation service reservoir station for this water. A search of every Utah station on that network returned no match. The dam inventory gives a normal storage of 7,560 acre feet and a maximum of 10,450, and neither is a reading.
The creekUSGS
no gauge
Box Elder Creek at Mantua, site 10126400, measured daily discharge from 1 October 1960 to 29 September 1963 and then stopped. Sixty three years. It is the only gauge ever placed on this water.
Forecast over the waterNWS
contacting the National Weather Service
About  ·  01

Two state sources disagree about whether it is safe to get in

A local health department posted a danger advisory in May 2026 and three outlets reported one in July. The state page for this reservoir shows an all clear and has not been updated since June 2024.

This is the most important thing on this page and it is not settled, so read the whole of it before deciding anything.

SourceWhat it saysDated
Bear River Health Department, the local health authority "Mantua Reservoir: Danger Advisory"27 May 2026
Three news outlets A danger advisory, the highest level8 and 9 July 2026
Utah's environmental department, on its own page for this reservoir "There are no current health advisories for this water body"page last updated 19 June 2024
The state page for this reservoir has not been updated in over two years and it currently displays an all clear. That was retrieved on 14 August 2026 and the two entries on it are both from June 2024, both reporting that the monitoring team saw no visible signs of a bloom . The department's statewide recreational water quality page names no waterbody at all and prints no date .

The health department notice is easy to miss even when you find it, because its headline reads "HABS WARNING Advisory" while the Danger line inside it belongs to this reservoir and the Warning belongs to a different water on the same notice .

This page cannot tell you whether that advisory is in force today. No rescind notice was found anywhere. Check with the Bear River Health Department before you or a dog get into this water, and do not rely on the state page, which is the one a search will hand you first.

The three news reports name three different bodies as the issuer: a threshold set by the state health department having been exceeded , the Bear River Health Department issuing it , and the Division of Water Quality issuing it . Those are not necessarily in conflict, because sampling, threshold setting and posting are different jobs. No source retrieved here says how they divide, so this page does not reconcile them and prints all three.

Not a Reclamation project. Reclamation's list of its Utah facilities does not include this reservoir . The owner is a city .

FieldValue
Owner typeLocal Government, and the state file gives the owner as Brigham City
RegulatorUtah Division of Water Rights, federally regulated No
Completed1961, earth, no recorded modification
Dimensions29 feet high and 11,140 feet long. That is a little over two miles of embankment holding back twenty nine feet of water
Hazard potentialHigh
Last inspected16 August 2023, on a one year cycle
Condition assessmentSatisfactory, dated 1 January 1994
Twenty nine years between the rating and the inspection, on a dam inspected annually . This series has now found a 1991 rating against a 2023 inspection, a 2012 rating against annual inspections, one dam with no rating at all, and this one.

The federal record's own vintage matters here. Its data updated field reads 28 March 2024 . A more recent state inspection may well exist, and this page does not claim none has happened since 2023.

Why the state file is not quoted for the newer dates. Utah publishes its dam inventory as a flat list, and that list drops empty cells rather than leaving them blank . Its opening block lines up cleanly and gives the owner, the stream and the regulator. From the dimensions onward the row cannot be aligned to its own headers without inventing at least two missing cells, and the copy this build retrieved stopped alphabetically before this dam. So two dates in that file that look like inspection dates are not published here, because this build cannot say which column either belongs to.

The dam is not on Box Elder Creek. The federal inventory files it on Big Creek , and the state watershed plan is more specific still :

"The two major inflows to the reservoir are Dam Creek and Maple Creek." And: "The outlet of the reservoir forms Big Creek."

So Big Creek is what comes out, not what goes in, and the two creeks that fill it are named after a dam and a tree . Box Elder Creek is real and it does reach this reservoir, but the watershed plan treats it as a diversion rather than as the stream the dam sits on. The one gauge that ever measured it is named for it: Box Elder Creek at Mantua . And the campground beside the water is Box Elder Campground, not Mantua Campground .

And there are two Mantuas. The federal names authority carries an incorporated Town of Mantua in Box Elder County, Utah, and an incorporated Village of Mantua in Portage County, Ohio . The federal water body query used to draw the outline on this page returns both this reservoir and Mantua Swamp, Ohio, in the same response . Any search for an incident at this water will return the other state, and Box Elder is also a town in South Dakota.

Science  ·  02

The hatchery, the phosphorus, and fourteen feet of water

A state hatchery producing about a third of Utah's stocked trout is also the largest permitted phosphorus source to the eutrophic reservoir it sits beside.

Both halves of this are stated by state agencies, and they are not stated in the same document.

The wildlife division says The water quality division says
The hatchery was "first constructed in 1910" and produces "roughly 6 million trout eggs a year, roughly 30% of the total trout stocked in Utah""The Mantua Fish Hatchery is a significant contributor of nutrients to the Reservoir, adding an estimated 304.4 kg/y TP (31% of total load)"
A hatchery supplying about thirty percent of the trout stocked across Utah contributes about thirty one percent of the phosphorus load to the reservoir beside it. The two figures are coincidentally similar and they are measuring completely different things, so nothing should be read into the match.

What is worth reading is the combination. Phosphorus is the pollutant this reservoir is impaired for, and the largest single permitted source of it is a state fish hatchery. Neither agency's document mentions the other's, and this page is putting them side by side rather than claiming any agency has drawn the connection.

The load figure is old. The watershed plan is dated 31 March 2000 , so the 304.4 kilogram figure is a quarter of a century old and the hatchery has been rebuilt since: the division completed a new facility there in February 2025, including a degassing tower, and the hatchery runs on groundwater rather than reservoir water . No newer load figure was found, so the old one is printed with its date attached and nothing is inferred about the present.

The state watershed plan is unambiguous about the condition of this water :

"The Clean Lakes Study verified that Mantua Reservoir is eutrophic and phosphorus is the nutrient limiting algae and aquatic plant growth."

MeasurePublished
Impaired forexceedances of the pH, dissolved oxygen and total phosphorus criteria
Protected usesClass 2B secondary contact recreation, Class 3A cold water game fish and aquatic life, Class 4 agricultural uses
Surface area"224 ha (554 acres)"
Mean depth4.3 metres, which is about fourteen feet
A shallow, warm, nutrient rich reservoir is a reservoir that blooms, and that is the physical explanation for the advisory history at the top of this page. Fourteen feet of average depth across five hundred and fifty four acres, with phosphorus named as the limiting nutrient, is close to a textbook description of the condition .

The plan is dated 31 March 2000. That is the newest agency document this build found giving this reservoir a depth or an area at all. No maximum depth is published in it, and none was found anywhere else.

Both dam records leave the surface area field empty . So the 554 acres on this page comes from the watershed plan and from nowhere else, and no shoreline length and no maximum depth is published by anyone.

The shape in the header is traced from the Fathom print artwork and checked against the federal water body polygon .

MeasureTracedFederalGap
Width against length0.92400.88364.57%
Share of its bounding box0.6830.6741.3%
Area, stretched on both axes522.6 acres515.4 acres1.41% over
The two drawings agree with each other closely and both fall short of the published area. Shape matches to 4.6 percent, fill ratios to 1.3 percent, and the self check is clean: adding up the federal polygon by hand gives 2.0857 square kilometres against the 2.0830 the dataset publishes, agreement to about thirteen hundredths of one percent.

But the polygon computes to 515 acres against the watershed plan's 554 , and it carries a null elevation , so it cannot be checked against a working pool. Seven percent short with no elevation stamp reads as a low pool snapshot, so this page publishes 554 acres and not 515.

About a mile and a sixth long and just over a mile wide, from the federal polygon. The polygon also carries a small island: the response has a second ring, which the area calculation subtracts .

Recreation  ·  03

Where everything is

Seven places, two of which are in Ohio.

The whole reservoir
Midpoint of the USGS National Hydrography Dataset water body extent, derived rather than published
Seven places, two of which are in Ohio.

The campground beside this water is Box Elder Campground, run by the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest's Logan Ranger District .

PublishedNot published
Open 4/24 to 10/4Number of sites
Potable water availableFees, which the page defers to the booking service for
Latitude and longitude, which is why the pin above is exactAny horsepower or wake restriction
The Forest Service does not present the reservoir as part of the campground. Its own sentence is that "Mantua Reservoir is a short drive from this campground" . The campground is named after the creek, not the lake.

It is not a state park, checked against the full Utah roster of forty six rather than against a sub page . No boat ramp, no horsepower limit and no wake restriction was found in any agency source read in this build, so none is stated here.

Every other page in this series carries at least one live federal number for the water itself. This one carries none, because none exists.

What is missingWhy
Reservoir storageNo soil conservation service station exists for this reservoir. A search of every Utah station on that network returned no match
Stream flowThe only gauge ever placed on this water, Box Elder Creek at Mantua, ran 1 October 1960 to 29 September 1963 and then stopped
Sixty three years since anything measured the flow, and no storage station at all. Three years of daily discharge and five peak flow readings is the entire instrumental record for this reservoir .

So the live strip at the top of this page has one working card and it is the weather. The other three say what is missing and why, which is the honest version of a dashboard for a water nobody measures.

That absence is worth holding next to the advisory question. A reservoir with a documented bloom history, a danger advisory this summer, and a state monitoring page two years out of date is also a reservoir with no public instrument on it of any kind.

Fishing  ·  04

Eight fish from one survey, and a ninth that is only a proposal

The longest evidenced species list in this series, all of it from a single electrofishing survey. Walleye is named here only in a proposed rule, so it is written and not drawn.

Bluegill

The division's 2023 survey found bluegill were "the most abundant species by number caught (58.9%)" . The reputation this reservoir has for bluegill is not angler folklore: it is the top line of an agency electrofishing survey.

58.9% by number

Largemouth bass

The same survey found largemouth bass were "the most abundant species by weight (46.6%)" . Most abundant by number and most abundant by weight are two different fish here, which is what a panfish reservoir with a healthy predator looks like.

46.6% by weight

Yellow perch

Caught in the 2023 survey . Also the reason this water appears in the fishing guidebook at all: it is on the page 12 list of waters where dead yellow perch may be used as bait .

2023 survey

Green sunfish

Caught in the 2023 survey . Drawn separately from bluegill because the division counted them separately, and they are easy to confuse in hand.

2023 survey

Black bullhead

Caught in the 2023 survey . One of two catfish family species the division recorded here.

2023 survey

Channel catfish

Caught in the 2023 survey . The division names it and gives no abundance figure for it, so none is given here.

2023 survey

Rainbow trout

Caught in the 2023 survey . Worth noticing given what sits on the shore: the hatchery beside this reservoir produces about thirty percent of the trout stocked in Utah .

2023 survey

Fathead minnow

Caught in the 2023 survey . A forage species, and the only fish on this page nobody fishes for.

2023 survey

This is the longest evidenced fish list in this series and the only one that comes from a single survey. Utah's wildlife division sampled this reservoir by boat electrofishing on 11 May 2023 and named eight species . All eight are drawn. Nothing else is.

Compare that with the water this series covered immediately before this one, where the entire evidenced list was two fish, one of them named only in a document on a commercial host. Here there is a named author, a sampling date, a method and percentages.

The two flagged fish are flagged because the report says so. Bluegill at 58.9 percent by number and largemouth bass at 46.6 percent by weight . The reservoir's reputation as a bluegill and bass water turns out to match what the division actually caught, which this series has not often been able to say.

What the report does not give. No abundance figure for the other six species, no length or weight distributions reproduced here, and no statement about a population trend. Only one report exists: addresses for 2022, 2024 and 2025 all return errors, so there is a single year of survey evidence and no series.

There is a ninth species associated with this reservoir and it is deliberately not drawn above.

On 12 August 2026 the wildlife division published proposed regulation changes including this line, verbatim :

"Adding no limit on walleye (an illegal introduction) at Mantua Reservoir and requiring all walleye caught to be killed."

Read what that sentence actually establishes. The division says walleye are here, says they were put here illegally, and proposes that anglers be required to kill every one they catch. It does not report a survey, a count, a date of discovery or a population estimate, and walleye do not appear in the 2023 electrofishing survey , which was two years earlier.

And it is a proposal, not a rule. The same release is explicit that the division is "seeking the public's feedback on the proposals", and the changes would take effect in 2027 and 2028 if approved . So this page draws eight surveyed fish and writes the ninth as a sentence, because a proposed rule is not a survey.

The same release proposes cutting the bluegill limit here from 50 to 15 . That is also a proposal. Anyone fishing this reservoir now is under the statewide limits, because this water has no entry in the current guidebook at all.

Mantua Reservoir has no waterbody entry in Utah's fishing guidebook. Not in the 2026 edition and not in the 2023 one . Statewide limits apply.

The name does appear once, and it is a detail worth having. Page 12 of the 2026 guidebook lists the waters where dead yellow perch may be used as bait, and this reservoir is on that list . That is a bait rule, not a limit, and it is the only appearance of the name in the document.

The absence was checked four ways: a literal string search, a full transcription of the printed run of entries where it would sit, an alphabetical order test, and a separately issued existence question. The alphabetical test settles it: the entries run Manning Meadow then McGath, and Mantua would sort between them.

Blue Ribbon: not designated. The division's Blue Ribbon page describes the programme and prints no list , and its most recent funding release, dated 15 July 2026, states there are 41 waterbodies including two mountain areas, names four project waters, and does not name this one .

Nothing on this page came from the division's fishing application. That application builds its content in the browser, so the served document contains no waterbody data for any water, and a search engine's stored title of it is not a source. That rule exists because this series published a Blue Ribbon claim off exactly such a title once and had to withdraw it.

Recreation  ·  05

What to watch for

A fish kill the wildlife division recorded in one line, no incident found in searchable press, and a shallow eutrophic reservoir that blooms hard enough to close.

The clearest sentence about what has actually happened in this water comes from the end of a fishery survey report, in the recommendations :

"Sample this water in 2024 to assess the impact of the fish kill that occurred in September 2023."

That is the wildlife division confirming a fish kill at this reservoir in September 2023, in one line, inside a document about something else. It gives no cause, no count and no species breakdown.

The state water quality board's minutes for October 2023 attribute that kill to treatment for harmful algal blooms. This build could not retrieve those minutes directly: the board's page is closed to automated reading. So the fish kill is stated here on the division's own authority and the algaecide connection is not, and the page says which is which rather than merging them.

The 2024 follow up survey the report recommends could not be found. Addresses for a 2024 report return errors, and the only report that exists for this water is the 2023 one. So whether the reservoir recovered is not answered by anything published.

No drowning, boating fatality, vehicle in the water, ice breakthrough, submerged debris recovery or dive operation at this reservoir was found in any source, agency or press.

The name problem here is unusually bad. There are two incorporated Mantuas in the United States, this one and a village in Portage County, Ohio , and the federal water body query that produced the outline on this page returns Mantua Swamp, Ohio, in the same response . Box Elder is also a town in South Dakota. A list assembled from search results would carry incidents from at least two other states.

The publishable sentence is "no incident found in searchable press". It is not "nothing has happened here."

Two gaps in this build, stated rather than hidden. Box Elder County sheriff records and Utah public safety records were not queried directly, and no source states which agency has primary water rescue responsibility at this reservoir. The town of Mantua has its own police department and the campground is federal, which are two more bodies in the same square mile.

The hazard at this reservoir is not an incident record. It is the water itself, and the state has described it in writing since 2000 .

ConditionSource
Eutrophic, with phosphorus the limiting nutrientthe watershed plan
Impaired for pH, dissolved oxygen and total phosphorusthe watershed plan
Mean depth 4.3 metres across 554 acresthe watershed plan
Danger advisory for a harmful algal bloomthe local health department, 27 May 2026
A fish kill in September 2023the wildlife division
Those five lines are a single story and every one of them is an agency statement. A fourteen foot deep, five hundred acre, nutrient rich reservoir at the edge of a town blooms, and this one has blooms serious enough to reach the highest advisory level and to prompt a treatment that killed fish.

Cyanobacteria affect dogs more than people, because dogs drink the water and lick their coats, and the health department's notice says to keep dogs out . Check the health department before going in.

And the classification is 2B , which the watershed plan glosses as secondary contact recreation. That is a designation setting which standards apply and it is not a statement that the water is unsafe. It is the context worth having at a reservoir where the practical question every summer is whether it is safe to swim.

A danger advisory was posted for this reservoir in May 2026 and the state page for the same water still shows an all clear from June 2024.

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 Mantua

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 Mantua. The advisory question is left open rather than answered, because a local health department and the state environmental department currently say different things and this page cannot establish which is current. There is no live water figure anywhere on it, because no storage station exists and the only stream gauge stopped in 1963. The surface area is the watershed plan's 554 acres and not the federal polygon's 515, because the polygon carries no elevation and falls seven percent short. Eight fish are drawn and a ninth is written but not drawn, because the ninth is named only in a proposed rule. Two dates in the state dam file that look like inspection dates are not printed, because that file drops empty cells and its columns cannot be aligned. And the reservoir is not on Box Elder Creek, whatever the creek and the campground beside it are called. This is a reference for the public and is not a navigation chart.