Protect

ROCKPORT

Summit County
Fathom Restoration
40° 46′ 17″ N
111° 23′ 26″ WROCKPORT RESERVOIR
Donate to Protect Rockport
There was a town in this valley from 1860 until 1952, when the federal government bought every property in it. The townsite is under the water and it comes back in a drought. Nothing here is on the National Register and no agency has ever assessed what is down there. Every figure here is quoted from its source.
1860The year the town was settled, under a different name
1952The year the government acquired every property in it
27Families still living there when the dam plans arrived
0Listings at Rockport on the National Register of Historic Places
101 acresThe only cultural survey ever done here, and not of the townsite
Live from the Weber
The storage record here goes back to February 1957, the year the dam was finished. The flow card is the outflow below the dam, whatever the station name says.
contacting federal services
Water in the reservoirNRCS
reading the daily storage record
Of capacityReclamation
against 62,100 acre feet
Outflow below the damUSGS
reading the Weber River near Wanship
Forecast over the waterNWS
contacting the National Weather Service
About  ·  01

A town of twenty seven families, bought out and flooded

Four names in ninety years, a wall built against a war, the buildings that were carried out before the water came, and a dam whose own agency publishes two different heights for it.

Settlers arrived in this valley in 1860. They called the place Crandall, then Enoch City after the first year. During the Black Hawk War of 1866 and 1867 they evacuated to Wanship, came back, and built a wall two feet thick and eight feet high around the settlement, after which it was called Rock Fort. When the war ended they pulled the wall down and used the stone in other buildings, and the town became Rockport .

Population stayed between one and two hundred . Summit County records about 200 residents in 1940 . By the 1950s, when the federal dam plans arrived, 27 families were left .

YearWhat happened
1860First settlement, called Crandall, then Enoch City
1866 to 1867Evacuation, return, and the wall. The town becomes Rock Fort
1952The government acquired all local property
1954 to 1957Reclamation built Wanship Dam
1966Utah State Parks took over and Rockport State Park opened
The townsite is under the water, and it is not gone. In September 2021 the reservoir dropped to about a quarter of capacity and the foundations of houses and the grade of the road came back into view. A Utah State Parks spokesman at the time: "It's kind of sad, because of the drought conditions, but it's a cool little glimmer to look back and see what was there" . That is a non agency account of an agency employee, and it is the clearest description of the townsite anyone has published.

The dam itself is not on the Weber at the town. It is a mile and a half above Wanship . The creek that runs into the reservoir from the east still carries the town's first name, Crandall Creek, and so does one of the park campgrounds.

Utah State Parks names two buildings that were moved rather than drowned: the Rockport Coop, which operated until 1930, and the Rockport School House, built in 1870. It says both went to Pioneer Village at Lagoon Amusement Park in Farmington .

That is true of where the schoolhouse is now, and not of how it got there. The fuller account: it was a one room log building about 18 by 28 feet with a flat rock floor, the town's first public building, moved a short distance in 1892 when the new social hall went up. Around 1954, Reclamation officials offered it to the Sons of Utah Pioneers, who moved it to Pioneer Village in Salt Lake City. It only reached Lagoon in 1975 to 1976, when that collection moved . Two moves, twenty years apart, and the state's own history page compresses them into one.

One building stayed in the valley. The Old Church, a one room white frame building, is at Rockport State Park today. It is said to have been built in 1892 about a mile and a half further south, moved here in 1956, and restored in 2005. None of those three dates comes from an agency. Utah State Parks does not mention the church on its history page at all . What it does do is rent it out at 825 dollars and name a campground loop after it .

Houses were reportedly moved to Peoa and Hoytsville. No agency document naming any of those houses or their addresses could be found. The cemetery is widely said to survive above the waterline, and no agency document confirms its status either way, and no record of any grave relocation programme could be found. This page does not assert what happened to it.

Nothing at Rockport or Wanship is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Not the townsite, not the Old Church, not the schoolhouse, not the co-op, and not Wanship Dam. The Summit County register runs to 113 properties and is overwhelmingly Park City, with entries in Coalville, Oakley, Kamas, Francis, Echo, Hoytsville and Peoa. There is no Rockport listing and no Wanship listing.

There is exactly one agency archaeological record touching this reservoir, and its scope matters. Reclamation's 2007 environmental assessment for a pipeline and pumping action carried out 100 percent pedestrian class I and class III cultural resource inventories over 101 acres, and reported: "No historic properties were located." The determination went to the Utah State Historic Preservation Office as report U-06-BE-1553w, and tribal consultation was carried out with the Uintah and Ouray Ute Tribe and the Northwest Band Shoshone Tribe .

Read the acreage. That survey covered the 101 acre footprint of a 2007 construction project. It is evidence that Reclamation looked at that ground and found nothing on it. It is not a statement that the inundated townsite has ever been surveyed, evaluated or recorded. No Utah historic preservation file on the Rockport townsite could be found, and the state's cultural resource information system is access restricted.

Also not found: any Daughters of Utah Pioneers or Sons of Utah Pioneers monument for the townsite, any interpretive sign text about it, and any townsite trail or overlook in the park. The state park's published interpretation of the town it sits on is a single web page .

Wanship Dam is a zoned earthfill structure on the Weber River, built 1954 to 1957 as part of the Weber Basin Project, authorised by Congress in 1949 . Operation and maintenance passed to the Weber Basin Water Conservancy District on 1 October 1968 .

MeasureFigureSource
Height156 ftReclamation's prose, on the dam page and the project page, and the 2007 assessment
175 ft structuralThe data table on the same Reclamation page, and the national dam inventory
Hydraulic height150 ft or 138 ftReclamation against the dam inventory
Crest length2,010 ft or 2,015 ftReclamation's prose against its own table
Capacity62,100 acre feetReclamation, the 2007 assessment and Utah State Parks
62,120 normal, 75,730 maximumThe national dam inventory
60,000 acre feet a yearWhat the water right actually permits to be stored
Drainage area339, 325.08, 334 or 335 sq miReclamation, the dam inventory, and two federal gauges
Four federal drainage areas for one reservoir. Some of that spread is legitimate, because a gauge above the dam drains less ground than the dam does. Reclamation's 339 and the dam inventory's 325.08 are not reconcilable that way. And the two heights sit in the prose and the table of the same Reclamation page, unreconciled.

The reservoir is designed to fill. The 2007 assessment states that "normal operations at Wanship Dam fill the reservoir annually and commonly generate spillway releases," and that it "has filled and spilled nearly every year" . There is also a maximum flood control reservation of 135,000 acre feet, which is more than twice the reservoir's own capacity and is a release obligation rather than a storage figure.

  • Who built it. No contractor name appears on Reclamation's facility page, in the 2007 assessment, on the water district's history, or in the dam inventory, whose designer and constructor fields are both empty .
  • What it cost. No construction cost figure was found from any source.
  • Any modification history. The dam inventory records none, and Reclamation's page has no modification section . That is a seventy year old high hazard dam with no published modification record.
  • A project history. Reclamation publishes written histories for the neighbouring Weber River Project and Ogden River Project. There is no Weber Basin Project history in that series, and the Weber River Project volume does not mention Wanship Dam or Rockport at all.
  • A condition rating. The inventory records the hazard potential as high, an inspection on 5 May 2022, and the condition assessment as not available .
Two oddities in the federal record are worth naming. The inventory lists an emergency action plan revision date of 26 September 2023 while leaving the field for whether an emergency action plan exists empty. And it records the dam's purpose as irrigation alone, where Reclamation and the water district describe irrigation, municipal and industrial supply, flood control, power and fish and recreation . There is a 1,425 kilowatt powerplant here, which the single purpose coding does not admit .

Rockport is not state regulated. The inventory records no state jurisdiction, permitting, inspection or enforcement, because Reclamation owns it . It is the same situation as every Reclamation dam in this series, and it means there is no Utah dam safety record to fall back on.

Science  ·  02

Three surface areas within two percent, and one fish out of five

The tightest set of published numbers in this series, a name the federal record does not use, a mercury advisory on the one long lived predator, and three algal blooms with one toxin figure between them.

The shape at the top of this page was traced by hand for a print, then scaled to the extent of the USGS water body polygon and measured off its own coordinates.

ScalingTraced areaAgainst the federal polygon
One scale factor, matched on width1,054 acres0.2 percent small
Stretched to fill the extent on both axes1,109 acres5.0 percent large
One scale factor, matched on length1,166 acres10.4 percent large

The two shapes are 5.2 percent apart on proportion, and matched on width the traced area lands within a quarter of one percent of the federal figure. That number is also close to the other two published areas: Reclamation gives 1,080 acres and the dam inventory gives 1,077 , against the polygon's 1,056.

Three published surface areas within two and a half percent of each other is unusually tight for this series, and it is worth saying why. Rockport is a narrow reservoir in a river valley that fills and spills nearly every year . A water body that is normally at the same level is a water body whose shoreline everyone agrees on.

The valley is this shape because of what is under it. The Utah Geological Survey's study of the Kamas and Coalville region records that the Absaroka thrust system is exposed along Rockport Reservoir and in the hills north of Kamas Valley, and that the Jurassic and Cretaceous rocks here are tilted and folded adjacent to those thrusts, from deformation related both to the Absaroka system and to younger thrusting on the North Flank system . North of the reservoir those Mesozoic rocks dip 10 to 30 degrees northwest, and springs come out of the side canyons of the Weber valley above it .

Traced from OpenStreetMap geometry under the Open Database License, and that credit travels with any public use of the shape. The drawing measures 2.52 miles on its long axis, the same as the federal extent. The federal recreation record describes the reservoir as "approximately three miles long and one-half mile wide." No Utah Geological Survey 1:24,000 geologic map of the Wanship, Coalville, Peoa or Hoytsville quadrangles could be found, so the regional bulletin above is the closest agency mapping of this ground.

Utah State Parks calls it Rockport Reservoir . Reclamation calls the water behind Wanship Dam Rockport Lake . So does the national dam inventory, in its other names field . And so does the federal hydrography dataset: a query on the name Rockport Reservoir returns nothing at all, and the polygon is filed as Rockport Lake, GNIS 01434857 .

It is coded as a lake rather than a reservoir. The federal survey assigns it FCODE 39009, a lake and pond code, on a water body that has a 175 foot earthfill dam holding it in . This page uses Rockport Reservoir, because that is the name on the park and the name people search for, and notes the federal one because anyone querying the federal data by the obvious name will get an empty result.

The elevation in the polygon record, 6,037 feet, is the spillway invert rather than a water surface . The storage station's published elevation, 5,930 feet, is the top of the dead pool . Neither is the elevation of the water on any given day, and both get quoted as if they were. Maximum depth, mean depth and shoreline length are not published by anyone.

Utah sampled five species here in 2021. Four came back clean and one did not :

SpeciesFish sampledMean mercuryRangeAbove the screening value
Smallmouth bass100.699 mg/kg0.3 to 1.0Yes
Yellow perch90.224 mg/kg0.2 to 0.3No
Rainbow trout90.140 mg/kg0.06 to 0.2No
Brown trout100.104 mg/kg0.04 to 0.2No
Kokanee100.096 mg/kg0.07 to 0.1No

The advisory for smallmouth bass, in maximum meals a month :

General publicWomen 16 to 50, children 6 to 16Pregnant or breastfeeding, children under 6
41Do not eat
The gap between the bass and everything else is the finding. Smallmouth bass came back at 0.699 milligrams a kilogram, seven times the kokanee figure and five times the brown trout figure, in a reservoir where every trout tested clean. The four trout and salmon species here are stocked and short lived. The bass is a long lived predator, and mercury accumulates.

The same advisory list carries Echo Reservoir, the next water down the Weber, for brown trout and smallmouth bass, and the Weber River itself for brown trout . The state environmental department confirms advisories exist in Utah for arsenic, mercury, selenium and PCBs and enumerates no water bodies, deferring to the health department .

Rockport has had at least three documented harmful algal bloom seasons, and between them they have produced exactly one published toxin concentration.

YearWhat is on the record
2017A bloom occurred. The state environmental department maintains a page for it. That page could not be read, on a certificate failure
2018Detected 19 June, advisory issued 20 June by the county health department. Found by staff doing routine bacteria monitoring who saw "small olive-green spheres." A sample at the main boat launch measured 7.5 micrograms of microcystin per litre . The state's own monitoring table records a last sample date of 20 June 2018 . The advisory was lifted within about a week
2022A warning advisory issued 12 September covering the entire reservoir, after monitors saw blue material at four shoreline sites and satellite imagery picked up blooms across multiple areas. No cell counts and no toxin concentrations were published, and no lift date was given
The one number in that whole table comes from a newspaper. The state runs three advisory tiers, health watch, warning and danger, and samples this kind of water about once a month from May to October . It publishes no numeric threshold for any of the three tiers on the page that describes them, and the per water body page that would carry Rockport's own results is closed to automated reading. So this page can tell you a warning advisory covered the whole reservoir in September 2022 and cannot tell you at what concentration.

On 27 July 2026 the park's own current conditions page listed the algae status as clear, attributed to the state health advisory panel . That page is the thing to check before you swim, not this one. In the 2018 season Echo, Jordanelle and Deer Creek were affected as well.

The storage station works and it is old. Station 10129400:UT:BOR has recorded reservoir contents since 1 February 1957, which is the year the dam was finished . It publishes daily, semimonthly and monthly series and all three return data, in three different shapes:

DurationWhat a value object actually contains
Dailydate and value
Semimonthlymonth, monthPart, year, value. No date, and monthPart is a string where the others are integers
Monthlymonth, year, value. No date
The gauge below the dam is filed under a name that puts it on the wrong side. USGS 10129500 sits at 40.7927 north; the dam sits at 40.7884. On this river north is downstream, so that gauge is the outflow, and it has a daily discharge record running back to 1 October 1950, seven years before the dam existed . The snow service carries the same gauge number under the name Rockport Reservoir Inflow, which reflects a computed inflow convention rather than where the instrument is. This page reads it as outflow and labels it as outflow.

The federal survey also has a lake site on the reservoir itself, sharing the storage station's number. It published daily values only between 18 July 1990 and 13 February 2000 and has been inactive since . Above the reservoir there is a gauge on the Weber near Peoa, draining 296 square miles, and one on Crandall Creek draining 11.8. The snow card in the strip above is Smith Morehouse at 7,640 feet in the Weber headwaters ; a snow course has been read in that same basin since April 1929.

Rockport is classified 1C, 2A, 3A and 4: protected as a domestic supply after treatment, for frequent primary contact recreation, for cold water game fish, and for agriculture. That is the strongest set of protections in the state's scheme and it is consistent with a reservoir that supplies drinking water.

How that was checked, and why it is worth saying. Earlier in this series an automated read of the water quality rules filed a similarly named water under the wrong county. So this classification was confirmed against two independent reproductions of the rule, which agreed on the classification, on the county, and on the alphabetical neighbours either side of it. The state's own official rules site returned an error, so both citations are mirrors of the rule rather than the rule itself.

What could not be determined. Rockport's current impairment listing and assessment unit. Utah's 2024 integrated report was approved by the federal environmental agency on 30 April 2024 , and the page for it carries no assessment unit tables. The federal assessment interface returned an authorisation error on every query, and the state's own assessment map is an interactive application with no documented interface behind it. No total maximum daily load for Rockport was found, and that is "not established" rather than "none exists."

Recreation  ·  03

Where everything is

Nine places, a campground the state describes three different ways, and the reservoir twelve miles downstream that everything here eventually reaches.

The whole reservoir
Midpoint of the USGS National Hydrography Dataset water body extent, GNIS 01434857, derived rather than published. The federal survey calls this water body Rockport Lake, not Rockport Reservoir, and a query on the reservoir name returns nothing
Nine places, and one of them is a building that was carried out of the valley before the water arrived.
ItemDetail
CampgroundsThe park page says five . The current conditions page names six open: Juniper, Crandall, Twin Coves, Cottonwood, Pinery, Riverside . The park map shows nine named loops plus two group sites
HoursUtah State Parks says 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. and calls it sixteen hour access . The federal booking record for the same park says 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. and calls it seventeen hour access
Day use20 dollars a vehicle, 15 for seniors, and 5 dollars to park on Highway 32 and walk in
CampingJuniper double 70; Cottonwood, Crandall Cove and Riverside 35 single and 45 double; Twin Coves 35; extra vehicle 25
Group300 dollars a reservation: Hawthorne and Riverside take 75 people and 40 vehicles, Crandall 40 and 15, Lariat 40 and 25
The Old Church825 dollars to rent the building
OtherMarina, boat ramp, a 3D archery range with full size animal targets, a dump station with potable water, and winter ice fishing and snowmobile access
No agency publishes a site count for any individual loop. Five state sources describe this campground and they give five, six and nine as the number of campgrounds, with no per loop totals anywhere. If you are planning around capacity, the reservation system is the only thing that will tell you.

Fees rose across eighteen Utah state parks effective 8 January 2026, Rockport among them. Utah State Parks publishes no coordinate for this park; the pin on the map above is the federal booking record's. Reclamation's 2007 assessment put the reservoir's annual recreation benefits at roughly 7 million dollars .

Rockport sits on the Weber mainstem. Everything released from Wanship Dam runs past Wanship, picks up Silver Creek, takes Chalk Creek at Coalville, and arrives at Echo Reservoir twelve miles north . That is a true upstream and downstream pair, and it is the only relationship among the Weber reservoirs that is a direct channel connection.

WaterRelationship to Rockport
Echo ReservoirDirectly downstream on the Weber mainstem. Built 1927 to 1931, which makes it older than the Weber Basin Project
The Weber River, Wanship to EchoThe tailwater. This reach is a designated Blue Ribbon fishery where the reservoir above it is not, and it carries its own mercury advisory for brown trout
East Canyon ReservoirOn East Canyon Creek, which joins the Weber at Morgan. Downstream, but on a different stream. Fathom has a page on it, and it is the only concrete arch dam among these
Lost Creek ReservoirOn Lost Creek, joining the Weber near Croydon. Same structure of relationship
Smith and Morehouse ReservoirUpstream, in the Weber headwaters, and paired with Rockport in the 2007 delivery scheme
Causey and PineviewA different river. Both are on the Ogden. Same project, no channel connection to this water
The evidence for pairing Rockport with Echo is not just the river. Both are on the same page 20 spearfishing bass closure list . Both are in the guidebook's list of reservoirs where dead yellow perch may be used as bait. Both carry mercury advisories on smallmouth bass . Both are classified 1C, 2A, 3A and 4. And a single county advisory covered both of them during an algal bloom in October 2017. Fathom has a page on Echo at /echo.

One correction worth carrying, because this page previously implied otherwise. The joint Echo and Rockport algal advisory was October 2017. The bloom documented at Rockport in June 2018, the one with the 7.5 microgram microcystin reading, was Rockport alone; the state's own 2018 monitoring table records Echo that year with an advisory status of none.

Ice fishing is a listed winter activity here and the park stays open year round . There is no Rockport specific ice guidance from any agency.

On 7 February 2015 four men fell through the ice on this reservoir. All four swam to shore, were treated by medics on the scene and released, and none was seriously hurt. The park manager's explanation is the thing to carry away: "When there's open water all around the edges of the reservoir, it's like you're on an iceberg." The sheet had separated from the shore and was moving with the wind. He declared the ice fishing season over that day .

That account is from a news outlet quoting the park manager, not from an agency release. It is printed because a detached ice sheet on a reservoir that is drawn down through the winter is the specific local hazard, and because no agency has published anything about ice at Rockport at all.

Fishing  ·  04

One night of netting, and the numbers are published

Seven species, a rainbow trout fishery that is 80 percent of the biomass, a kokanee year class that was never produced, and a guidebook rule a machine tried to invent.

Kokanee salmon

Four fish in the 2022 nets, one weak adult age class, and survival to maturity that the division says "warrants concern." None were stocked at all in 2023, because the state's brood run failed.

4 fish, and none stocked in 2023

Smallmouth bass

One fish in the 2022 nets, and the only species here that carries a consumption advisory. Mean mercury 0.699 milligrams a kilogram, seven times the kokanee figure.

Do not eat, for the most vulnerable group

Rainbow trout

104 of the 137 fish caught in 2022, 75.9 percent of the catch and 80.3 percent of the biomass. The division stocks 20,000 a year and recommends continuing.

104 of 137 fish, 80% of the biomass

Brown trout

Nine fish, and the only species in the 2022 survey whose condition the division did not call acceptable.

The one species below acceptable condition

Yellow perch

Ten fish, and the report flags something it cannot explain: they were split between two habitats, shallow and deep, and the division has an open action to find out why.

Split between two habitats, unexplained

Utah chub

Five fish. The report's judgement is that the population "appeared to be under control," which is not a sentence that gets written about chub very often in Utah.

Under control, for once

Utah sucker

Four fish, and 8.5 percent of the biomass off 2.9 percent of the catch, which tells you how much bigger they are than everything else in the net.

2.9% of the catch, 8.5% of the weight

Most waters in this series have no fishery report at all. Rockport has one, and it publishes its numbers. Four curtain gillnets were set overnight on 19 April 2022 and retrieved at dawn. The nets are a new design the division brought in during 2021: 45.7 metres long by 6.1 metres deep, six panels, mesh from 13 to 64 millimetres, three of them suspended at six metre intervals through the open water and one set on the bottom near shore .

SpeciesCaughtShare of catchShare of biomassMean length
Rainbow trout10475.9%80.3%367 mm
Yellow perch107.3%1.4%198 mm
Brown trout96.6%3.6%307 mm
Utah chub53.6%2.3%280 mm
Kokanee42.9%2.7%361 mm
Utah sucker42.9%8.5%
Smallmouth bass10.7%1.1%

Rainbow trout came in at 26.0 fish a net night and had their highest abundance in the top six metres. On condition, the report is blunt: "All target species except Brown Trout were acceptable" .

The chub sentence is the one to notice. "Population size of Utah Chub appeared to be under control" . Elsewhere in this series Utah chub is the fish that gets whole lakes poisoned. Here the division's standing action is simply to keep watching it, and to alter the rainbow stocking if chub numbers move, because the trout are what holds it down.

Four kokanee in four nets. The report: the size structure "suggested a single, weak adult age class", and the low abundance "suggested survival to age-3, and subsequently survival to maturity, was low and warrants concern" .

The division's own recommendation is to evaluate the programme rather than defend it: three years of stocking were done to try to establish a naturally reproducing population, and no stocking at all was performed in 2023, "because of a low number of broodstock spawning, limiting the number of offspring available to be stocked throughout the state" .

That is a statewide hatchery failure showing up in one reservoir's catch. The fish were not lost here. They were never produced, because the brood run failed somewhere else, and a whole year class of Rockport kokanee simply does not exist.

The report's five standing actions, in its own order: keep using the new net design and run a power analysis after two more years; keep stocking 20,000 rainbow trout; evaluate the kokanee programme; watch the chub and be ready to alter rainbow stocking; and find out why the yellow perch are separating into two assemblages, which it suggests may be about refuge habitat or about oxygen and temperature changing when the reservoir is drawn down . No annual stocking numbers could be read from any source, and the division's stocking application truncates alphabetically before the R waters.

Rockport Reservoir has no entry of its own in the rules for specific waters. Statewide general limits apply. Its only appearance in the 2026 guidebook is on page 20, on the seasonal bass closure list :

"The following waters are closed to the possession of largemouth and smallmouth bass from April 1 through June 27, 2026 (the fourth Saturday in June) while underwater spearfishing."

Rockport is on that list with Deer Creek, East Canyon, Echo, Flaming Gorge, Lake Powell, Pineview, Recapture, Red Fleet, Starvation and Steinaker . It applies only to spearfishing. Ordinary angling for bass is not restricted in that window.

An automated read of the guidebook invented a rule for this reservoir, and it was caught. The first read produced a bullet reading "Rockport Reservoir, Summit County. Additional restrictions apply. See exceptions below," and reported a second Rockport mention whose quoted text actually belonged to Red Fleet. Neither exists. Three further reads contradicted both, the alphabetical neighbours were checked in the closure list and in the special regulations list, and the date arithmetic was verified: the fourth Saturday of June 2026 is indeed 27 June. This is the third time in this series that this document has produced a fabricated entry. It is written up here because anyone reading that PDF the same way will get the same invented answer.

No state record fish has ever been taken from Rockport . And Rockport is not a Blue Ribbon fishery: it does not appear on the division's Blue Ribbon page, which states the programme covers 43 water bodies and publishes the list only in a downloadable card . The Weber River from Echo to Wanship is, which is the tailwater immediately below this dam.

Recreation  ·  05

What to watch for

Two drownings that were almost the same incident, four men on a detached ice sheet, and a long list of things nobody publishes.

Two modern fatalities on this reservoir are documented, and they are almost the same incident seven years apart.

18 July 201521 July 2022
What happenedSeparated from a paddleboard at about 3:11 p.m.Fell from a paddleboard with his dog. The dog was wearing a life jacket and reached shore
FlotationA life jacket was issued with the rental and he was not wearing itNot wearing one
ConditionsA microburst, 50 mile an hour gusts, two to three foot wavesNot reported
How he was foundSonar. No divers were deployedDrones, a remote operated vehicle and sonar, recovered 150 to 200 yards from shore
Who respondedTwo county search and rescue teams, the state public safety department, air ambulance and state parksTwo county search and rescue teams, the state public safety dive team, and state parks

Sources for both are news outlets quoting the agencies involved . The 2015 death was reported as the first paddleboard related death in Utah, and the park manager said it was the first drowning at Rockport since 1995 . No detail on the 1995 incident could be found.

Both recoveries were made by sonar and a remote vehicle rather than by divers, and that is worth stating on a page published by a diver led organisation. On open water in a canyon reservoir, a search is a sonar problem before it is a diving problem. The actionable fact is the one both incidents share: flotation was available in the 2015 case and was not being worn in either.

The wind is the best evidenced hazard here. A microburst produced two to three foot waves on a reservoir roughly three miles long and half a mile wide, lying along a canyon. The park manager in 2015: "Even the best swimmer can't fight off waves that size." No agency operates a wind station on this reservoir.

  • Who built this dam, what it cost, and whether it has ever been modified. The inventory's designer and constructor fields are empty and its modification field is empty .
  • A condition rating for a high hazard dam. Hazard high, inspected 5 May 2022, condition not available . Not state regulated, so no Utah record either.
  • Maximum depth, mean depth and shoreline length, from anyone, including the 2022 fishery report and the 2007 assessment.
  • Rockport's current impairment listing and any total maximum daily load.
  • Any cell count for any algal bloom here, in any year, and any numeric threshold for the state's three advisory tiers. One toxin figure exists for one day in 2018 and it comes from a newspaper .
  • Annual stocking numbers from any source.
  • Whether the yellow perch, smallmouth bass or Utah chub here were illegally introduced. The 2022 report does not say, and Rockport does not appear in the division's illegal introduction releases. Report as unknown. There is also no record of any rotenone treatment ever at this reservoir.
  • The fate of the Rockport cemetery, and any record of a grave relocation programme.
  • Any state historic preservation file on the townsite, and any monument, marker, interpretive sign or trail about it.
  • Per campground site counts, and a coordinate for anything in this park from Utah State Parks.
  • A settled visitation figure. The state's own compiled data gives 864,853 for 2020 and 759,199 for 2021, where a 2022 news report gives "nearly 175,000 visitors in the prior year." Those cannot both be right, and the primary annual files are spreadsheets this page could not read. No visitation number is printed on this page.
Quagga mussels are not here. The wildlife division states Utah's infested waters are limited to Lake Powell, and Rockport is named on no mussel list . The statewide rule still applies: clean, drain and dry, and decontaminate before entering another water.

There is a town at the bottom of this reservoir and no agency has ever surveyed it.

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 Rockport

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

FATHOM RESTORATION
Four things on this page are narrower than what is usually written about Rockport. The schoolhouse did not go straight from this valley to Lagoon: it went to Pioneer Village in Salt Lake City around 1954 and only reached Lagoon in 1975 to 1976, and the state's own history page compresses those two moves into one. The only cultural resource survey ever carried out at this reservoir covered 101 acres of a 2007 construction footprint and found nothing there, which is not a statement that the inundated townsite has been assessed. The dates given for the Old Church come from a geocaching record and from no agency. And no visitation figure is printed at all, because the state's compiled numbers and a contemporary news report differ by a factor of four and the primary files could not be read. The outline above was traced for a print and checked against the federal water body polygon; matched on width it lands 0.2 percent from the federal area, and the two shapes are 5.2 percent apart on proportion. Nobody publishes a depth for this water. This is a reference for the public and is not a navigation chart.