Protect

PIUTE

Piute County
Fathom Restoration
38° 16′ 42″ N
112° 12′ 05″ WPIUTE RESERVOIR
Donate to Protect Piute

Utah's wildlife division writes that this reservoir was mostly drained at least four times in one decade. Every figure on this page is quoted from the record it appears in.

Three live readings and a forecast
The storage figure is monthly and flagged derived rather than observed. The flow card is the river going in, not the release, because the gauge on the release stopped in 2003.
contacting federal services
Water in the reservoirNRCS
contacting the federal storage service
Share of normal storageDerived
Worked out from the reading beside it against the dam inventory. This is arithmetic on this page and not a separate measurement.
The river going inUSGS
contacting the geological survey
Forecast over the waterNWS
contacting the National Weather Service
About  ·  01

Mostly drained at least four times in one decade, and the state wrote it down

A 1938 privately owned dam on a drainage of 2,440 square miles, carrying a condition rating from 1991. And a surface area in general circulation that is about half again the federal one.

Most pages in this series have to work out whether a reservoir is low. Here the wildlife division says it outright .

"Just during the past decade, the reservoir was mostly drained at least four times (2014, 2015, 2016, 2018)."

Four times in ten years, and that sentence was written in 2019. The same author added the following year that "Reservoir capacity reached 7% (5,000 ac-ft) in September 2020" .

The live card at the top of this page reads lower than that. This is not a reservoir having a bad year. It is a reservoir that empties, and the agency managing its fishery has said so in two consecutive published reports.

Note what the division divides by. 5,000 acre feet called 7 per cent implies a denominator near 71,400, and the dam inventory gives normal storage as 71,826 . So the percentage on this page uses the same denominator the division used, and the card says so.

The maximum is nearly double the normal. The inventory gives 136,855 acre feet maximum against 71,826 normal , a ratio of about 0.53, so a percentage here depends entirely on which figure you divide by. Both are printed on the card.

The dam record, in full .

FieldValue
Completed1938, earth. Years modified: empty
Size90 feet high, 1,403 feet long
Storage136,855 acre feet maximum, 71,826 normal
Drainage area2,440 square miles
Hazard potentialHigh
Condition assessmentSatisfactory, dated 1 January 1991
Last inspected13 July 2023, on a one year cycle
Owner typePrivate. The record names no owner
Regulated byUtah Division of Water Rights. Federally regulated: No
Surface areaField empty
Two thousand four hundred and forty square miles. The reservoir this series covered immediately before this one has a drainage area of one . Same state, same summer, same dry year, and one of them collects from an area the size of Delaware while the other is filled by hand through a canal.

A Satisfactory rating dated 1991 against an inspection in 2023 is the sixth variation this series has found in that field pair, and it is thirty two years of gap. The correct sentence is that the inventory carries a 1991 assessment in a record transmitted in 2024, not that anyone rated this dam recently.

One field is internally inconsistent: the emergency action plan prepared field is empty while a plan review date of 18 May 2016 is populated . No claim is made here about whether a plan exists.

The dam is on the Sevier River, nine miles from Marysvale . A 90 foot high privately owned dam classified High hazard is an unusual combination, and this page states it exactly as the inventory does rather than characterising it. Maximum discharge 1,220 cubic feet per second, spillway uncontrolled.

Two figures are in circulation and they are a long way apart.

SourceSurface area
The federal water body dataset, as published 2,226 acres
The same polygon, added up by hand for this page2,231 acres
The dam inventory Field empty
State promotional writing and general circulation 3,360 acres
The popular figure is about half again the federal one. The two federal computations agree with each other to about two tenths of one per cent, and this page prints both figures without preferring either.

Here is why this one is not a simple case of the popular number being wrong. On the previous page in this series the traced outline and the federal polygon agreed closely and the popular figure was the outlier. Here the traced outline agrees better with the popular figure than with the federal polygon, which is the subject of the outline section under Science. A polygon can be a partial pool footprint and this page does not know that it is not.

The elevation trap. The polygon stamps 1,820 on this record with no unit . As feet it would put the reservoir at 1,820 feet. The federal gauge datum on the reservoir itself is 5,900.80 feet . As metres, 1,820 works out to 5,971 feet, which fits. So it is metres. A reservoir earlier in this series carries 8,083 in the same field and that one is feet. No maximum depth, mean depth or shoreline length is published by anyone.

Science  ·  02

The advisory names this reservoir and does not apply to it

Utah defines a river reach by naming this reservoir and the one sixteen miles south east. Neither carries the advisory. Under that, the first outline check in this series to fail, and a release nobody has measured since 2003.

Piute Reservoir has no fish consumption advisory. Neither does Otter Creek. But both names appear on Utah's advisory page, in the same heading .

Verbatim:

"East Fork Sevier River (between Otter Creek and Piute Reservoirs; Piute County)"

SpeciesHg LevelPregnant women and childrenWomen of childbearing ageEveryone else
Brown trout0.6190 four ounce meals a month1 eight ounce meal a month5 eight ounce meals a month
The two reservoirs are the endpoints that define the reach. The river between them carries the advisory, for brown trout, at 0.619, which is the highest mercury figure this series has printed .

This was checked from both ends. The page for Otter Creek made the same statement from the other side, and this build confirmed it independently by transcribing the complete run of entries around where each reservoir would sort. Piute would fall between Pineview and Porcupine. Otter Creek between Newton and Pelican Lake. Both positions are empty.

No date line sits above this block. A line reading "Fish Consumption Advisory (4/23/18)" appears higher on the same page above a different waterbody. It is not this block's date and it is not borrowed here. This series published a borrowed date once and had to correct it.

Brown trout is drawn on this page for that reason, and because the 2020 nets caught exactly one of them . The advisory is about the river, not the reservoir, and a brown trout does not stay on one side of a dam because a heading says so. What this page can say is what Utah published, and Utah published a reach.

This is the first page in this series where the traced outline and the federal polygon do not agree, and the disagreement was large enough to be worth taking apart rather than printing .

MeasureTracedFederalGap
Width against length, in the drawing's own axes0.38450.270442.2%
Smallest rectangle that contains the shape0.29020.254913.8%
Principal axes of the outline0.27870.224724.0%
Area, matched on the long axis3,892 acres2,231 acres74% over
The first row is misleading and that is the finding. Every previous page in this series measured width against length in the drawing's own axes. For a shape six and a half miles long and under two miles wide, that test is dominated by rotation: turn a long thin outline a few degrees inside its box and the box gets much wider while the shape does not change at all.

So two rotation independent measures were added. The smallest rectangle that will contain the shape, and the principal axes of the outline itself. Both are much smaller than 42 per cent, which means most of the first number was rotation.

But not all of it. Thirteen to twenty four per cent on shape and 74 per cent on area is still a real disagreement, and it is by a wide margin the worst in this series. The traced outline is a fatter reservoir than the federal polygon is.

What this page will not do is decide which one is right. The federal polygon self checks cleanly: adding it up by hand gives 9.0271 square kilometres against the 9.007 it publishes, agreement to about two tenths of one per cent . So the polygon is internally consistent. It may still be a partial pool footprint, and on a reservoir the state says was mostly drained four times in a decade that is not a remote possibility. The traced outline, at about 3,892 acres matched on length, sits closer to the 3,360 acres in general circulation than to the federal 2,226. Three numbers, no winner, all printed.

Ten daily records exist in this county across seven sites, and only four have anything to do with this reservoir .

RecordPeriod
Piute Reservoir storage, site 10191000, site type LK 22 March 1914 to 14 September 1995. 22,203 values
Sevier River below Piute Dam, site 10191500 17 May 1911 to 29 September 2003. 33,346 values
Sevier River near Kingston, site 10183500 12 June 1914 to today, 40,973 values, still reporting
Sevier River near Junction, site 101905001910 to 1916. 2,191 values
The release gauge died in 2003 and the storage gauge died in 1995. What kept the storage series alive is a different agency on the same site number: the soil conservation service publishes 10191000:UT:BOR monthly and its record runs from March 1914 . Same number, different network, and only one of them is still answering.

So the flow card on this page is an inflow, not a release. It is the Sevier River above the reservoir, and the card says so in every state. Nothing found in this build measures what leaves this dam.

And there are two gauges called near Kingston. Site 10183500 on the Sevier River is the one on this page. Site 10189000 on the East Fork Sevier is the one on the Otter Creek page, two and a half miles east, and it is the gauge that sits on the reach the mercury advisory names . Same town in both names, different rivers, one on each page.

The storage figure is monthly and flagged derived rather than observed . The station advertises a daily series and a semimonthly one and returns an empty array for both, which is the same behaviour the station sixteen miles south shows. That is the network and not this reservoir. No 303(d) listing, no pollution budget and no beneficial use class was established here, and the limnological assessment that would carry a depth and a trophic state could not be fetched at all.

Recreation  ·  03

Where everything is

Seven places, two of them gauges that stopped, one of them the other reservoir in this county.

The whole reservoir
Midpoint of the USGS National Hydrography Dataset water body extent, derived rather than published
Seven places, two of which are gauges that stopped and one of which is the other page in this county.

Piute is a Utah state park , one of the few waters in this series that is, and so is the reservoir sixteen miles south east.

The algae record here is real and small. Utah's environmental department publishes a recreational monitoring page for this reservoir with three dated updates, all from 2024 :

21 May 2024, bacteria measured below recreational thresholds. 12 June 2024, "Our monitoring team saw visible signs of harmful algae at Piute Reservoir." 18 June 2024, the samples from 12 June showed low levels.

No Health Watch, no Warning and no Danger advisory appears on that page . That is a different programme from the fish consumption advisory above, measures a different thing, and the two should not be read together.

Two state sources were not reconciled and this page says so rather than picking. The environmental department page shows no current advisory . Check with the park and with the health department before you swim, because the local health district is the body that actually issues bloom advisories for this county, from its Junction office . Neither publishes a machine readable feed, so nothing on this page updates itself about algae.

The practical consequence of everything above is short. The usable water here is not a fixed thing.

The division put it plainly in 2020 : "the minimum pool left does not provide consistently sufficient conditions for successful trout fishery." That sentence is about fish, and it is also about depth.

Another reservoir in this series showed the operational version. In 2021 responders at a drawn down Utah reservoir could not launch their boats, because the water was too low and the dock was closed, and carried out a recovery with kayaks and by swimming.

Any figure on this page describing the size of this water is a figure about a full pool. Six and a half miles long is a full pool number. Two thousand two hundred acres is a full pool number. The live card is the one that is about today.

What could not be sourced about this park. No horsepower or wake restriction, no boat ramp specification or coordinate, no camping fee, no season dates and no accessibility information was established from an agency page in this build. Utah state parks sub pages have served the wrong park repeatedly in this series, including a fees address that returns a golf course at the other end of the state, so nothing is quoted here that was not confirmed to be about Piute.

Fishing  ·  04

Two surveys, six nets, three species

The reports name ten fish and the nets held three. The most abundant one is a sucker, and the division says so in its own words.

Rainbow trout

56 caught in the 2020 nets and 5 in 2019. The fish this reservoir is managed for, and the one that comes back when the water does.

Brown trout

One. A single brown trout in the 2020 nets. It is also the species Utah names in the mercury advisory on the river below, at 0.619.

Named in the advisory

Utah sucker

98 of the 103 fish the 2019 nets held. The division writes that suckers came to dominate this fishery, "comprising up to 99% of fish biomass".

The dominant fish

Utah's wildlife division has published two trend net surveys for this reservoir, for 2019 and 2020, both by Mike Hadley . Between them the nets caught three species.

SurveyWhat the nets held
2 and 3 April 2019Rainbow trout 5, Utah sucker 98. The catch was about 95 per cent sucker
8 and 9 April 2020, six gill nets, four floating and two diving, fished overnightRainbow trout 56, brown trout 1, Utah sucker 60. About half
This species list started at ten and ended at three, and the difference is what the reports were read for. Both documents name smallmouth bass, wipers, channel catfish, Utah chubs, white crappie, tiger muskie and saugeye. Not one of them was in a net.

The division on the bass, wipers and catfish: they "were absent from the trend net catch" . On the chubs: they "have been relatively absent from the catch" and none were observed in 2020 . White crappie is a request filed for 2021 . Tiger muskie and saugeye appear once each, in a sentence about what "likely present the best chance to establish a sport fishery" , which is a plan.

Drawing a fish because a report contains its name would have put seven species on this page that no net has held. This page draws what was caught.

2021 through 2025 do not exist at the same addresses, tried in the same pattern. So the newest agency survey of this water is six years old, and the reservoir has been through at least two more drawdowns since . The file naming is also not what the neighbouring reservoir uses: these sit under fishing rather than fish, with the year last rather than in the middle. Recorded because it cost this build several attempts to find them.

The division, on what happened here :

"Utah suckers came to dominate the Piute Reservoir fish community, comprising up to 99% of fish biomass."

A Utah sucker is a native fish and it is not the villain of this page. It is drawn and flagged because it is the honest answer to the question this page is usually asked, which is what is in there. In 2019, 98 of the 103 fish the nets held were suckers.

The reason is the water, and the division says that too. Repeated drawdowns favour a fish that tolerates them over trout that do not, and "the minimum pool left does not provide consistently sufficient conditions for successful trout fishery" .

The 2020 numbers are the interesting half. After a refill the nets came up 56 rainbow trout, 1 brown trout and 60 suckers . The trout come back when the water does. That is the argument for caring what the storage card at the top of this page says.

Utah chub is not drawn, and that is a deliberate difference from the neighbouring page. Sixteen miles south east the chub is one of six species drawn, because the division caught them there. Here the division writes that none were observed in 2020 at all . Two reservoirs in one county, both managed by the same biologist, with different problems.

The two reservoirs in this county were given the same idea and it went differently.

At Otter Creek, sixteen miles south east, the division records that "Based on these results, the addition of wipers to the Otter Creek Reservoir fishery commenced in 2011", and by 2022 it was calling that water "Utah's best RBT sport fishery" .

At Piute the same idea was tried, and the division writes that attempts to establish wipers that could prey on suckers and chubs "were also hampered by variable water levels" .

Same predator, same county, same biologist, opposite outcome, and the stated difference is the water. A fish stocked to eat another fish has to survive long enough to do it.

Stocking continues. The division records that "An annual quota of 50,000 fingerling channel catfish was added in 2019" . No channel catfish has appeared in a net in either published survey . This page does not draw one. The stocking application could not be read either: it truncates alphabetically well before P and ignores its own filter parameters.

Three things a fishing page is expected to answer.

The emergency order does not cover this reservoir. On 2 July 2026 the division lifted or raised fishing limits at seven Utah waters because of low water . Piute is not one of the seven. Otter Creek is, and its entry reads "Otter Creek Reservoir, Piute County", so the words Piute County in that release attach to Otter Creek and not to this water. That is exactly the kind of adjacency that produces a wrong page, and it was checked by transcribing all seven.

The guidebook. This page states no fishing rule. The document has returned a fabricated entry with a correct county elsewhere in this series, and a strict existence question confirmed the fabrication rather than catching it . Check the current guidebook yourself.

Blue Ribbon. Not confirmed and not denied. The programme page publishes no list and no count , and the most recent funding release states 41 waterbodies and does not name this one . A water the division describes as unable to sustain a consistent trout fishery is unlikely to hold the designation, and that reasoning is not evidence, so it is not published as a finding.

Recreation  ·  05

What to watch for

Nothing found in the incident record, said carefully. A reservoir at about four per cent of normal storage. And a name that is a county, a reservoir and two other reservoirs at the same time.

No drowning, boating fatality, vehicle in the water, ice incident or submerged debris recovery at Piute Reservoir was found in agency or press sources.

That is a search based negative and it is much weaker than the negatives elsewhere on this page. The advisory finding is a fetched negative: a specific page was read and the entry was absent. This is not that. It means nothing surfaced, from searching.

And the search here is unusually hard, for one reason. The county is called Piute, the reservoir is called Piute, and there is a second large reservoir in the same county. An incident at Otter Creek Reservoir is an incident in Piute County, and press writing routinely compresses that into a phrase that reads like this water.

The neighbouring page carries two recorded recoveries, one of them a body recovery in which dive crews from two hundred miles north assisted the county team. Both were in Piute County and neither was at this reservoir.

No sheriff or state posting for any incident at this reservoir was retrieved, so nothing on this page is in agency voice on that subject. Absence of a record is not absence of an event, and on a water with no boat ramp specification, no published depth and no gauge on its own release, that gap is worth naming rather than reading as safety.

The single most important condition here is on the live strip at the top of this page .

Read the last two years in order. The reservoir held 66,540 acre feet in March 2024. It fell to 3,551 by August 2025, refilled to 34,465 by March 2026, and was back down to 3,148 by July 2026 .

The July 2026 reading is lower than the previous year's August low, a month earlier in the season. Against the inventory's normal storage of 71,826 that is about four per cent .

What that means for anyone going in the water. On a reservoir six and a half miles long the shoreline moves a very long way, the ramp position changes, and structure that was in thirty feet of water is in five or in none. The division has already told you what it does to the fish.

The neighbouring reservoir held 5,483 acre feet in the same month, against a normal of 52,660. Two reservoirs in one county, both at roughly a tenth or less of normal pool in July 2026, and only one of them is under an emergency fishing order . This page does not know why and does not guess.

The name is doing three jobs, and only one of them is this reservoir.

ThingWhat it is
Piute Reservoir, this oneWater body 120027911, reach code 16030001001402, on the Sevier River
Piute CountyThe county, which also contains Otter Creek Reservoir
Two other Piute ReservoirsFederal records return three water bodies of this exact name nationwide
The dangerous one is the county. Any sentence of the form something happened at Piute in Piute County can be about either reservoir, and the state's own emergency fishing order contains exactly that construction: "Otter Creek Reservoir, Piute County" . Read quickly, that release looks like it covers this water.

The spelling is a separate trap. Piute, Paiute and Pahute all appear in American place names, and the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah is a distinct entity from the county and from this reservoir. The dam inventory records no tribal land status for this dam .

To pin this water down, use a number rather than a name. Water body 120027911, names identifier 01444469, reach code beginning 16030001 , dam UT00249 , storage station 10191000 . Every figure on this page was pulled by one of those.

Utah says this reservoir was mostly drained four times in a decade. In July 2026 it held about four per cent of normal storage.

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 Piute

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

FATHOM RESTORATION
Several things on this page are narrower than what is usually written about Piute. Three fish are drawn rather than ten, because the two published surveys name ten species and their nets held three. Both surface area figures are printed and neither is preferred, because this is the first page in the series where the traced outline agrees better with the popular figure than with the federal polygon. The mercury advisory is described as belonging to the river between this reservoir and Otter Creek and not to either reservoir, because that is what the heading says, and no date is attached to it because that block carries none. No fishing rule is stated, because the state guidebook could not be read reliably. Blue Ribbon is neither confirmed nor denied. No fee, ramp specification, horsepower limit or season date is printed, because none was confirmed from a page that was verified to be about this park. And the incident section reports that nothing was found rather than that nothing happened. This is a reference for the public and is not a navigation chart.