Seeps, Springs, and Bogs: The Changing Historic Landscape of Smithfield

Seeps, Springs, and Bogs: The Changing Historic Landscape of Smithfield

By ROBERT PARSON

Smithfield, Utah, sits about thirty miles south of the Utah-Idaho border at the eastern edge of Cache Valley. In the fields west of town lies an area not unlike those in other Utah valleys where drainage from the mountains, along with the drainage of civilized endeavors, accumulates. Here it is possible to forget that one is living in a high mountain desert. The aquifer rises in springs and seeps and settles in watercress-choked bogs, eventually finding its way, by tributary, to the Bear River

The springs in the west fields are far different from the muddy Bear. Alongside the gravel road leading west from town, an old tin cup used to hang on a fencepost next to a small bubbling spring It was a community watering hole, and many passersby stopped to enjoy a cool dip from the pristine waters. Although it is likely that no one ever got sick from drinking the spring water, people gradually began to avoid the practice. If nothing else, the demise of the community watering hole was symbolic of change. The old gravel road is oiled now, and the spring is dry But even if it were not, no one would think of drinking from it today.

Despite this and other changes, the landscape still looks familiar. The Merrill and Noble spring stream, for instance, still meanders to the west through the fields and pastures where, when it is not being used for irrigation, it merges with Summit Creek and continues in its course toward the Bear River. But, like the community watering hole, it flows less vigorously than it once did

Over time, the springs and drains in the west fields created a haven for wildlife: yellow-breasted and red-winged blackbirds nested among cattails; frogs gorged themselves on insects drawn to the cool, moist micro-climate; water snakes found refuge in culverts and outlet pipes to the drain fields; and trout that in spring or fall migrated there to spawn grew fat and pinkmeated on a diet of freshwater shrimp.

No w much of that landscape is disappearing. Willow trees, which depend on high water tables, are slowly dying The groves of cottonwoods and poplars that farmers planted to shade out the moss and weeds in the canal are also succumbing to decreased levels of groundwater. Gone, too, are the wet areas in the center of fields that farmers learned from experience not to cultivate and where one could stand on the sod, bounce up and down, and feel the earth shake for fifty feet all around Recent human activity has been the main agent of change. Yet change has not been confined to the recent past; decades ago, it was probably human manipulation of the landscape that first created these springs and bogs.

Since the time of first settlement, traditional irrigation has substantially altered the flow of groundwater in Cache Valley The construction of canals that diverted water from riverbeds and streams, conveying it along the high benches to various laterals along the way, resulted in a complex re-plumbing of Cache Valley. Not only was the 'water forced from its original channels, depleting those flows, but it also seeped away from the canals, altering the flow of groundwater to lower lands.1 This re-plumbing made it possible for settlers living closer to the valley's center to reuse the wastewater for their own irrigation needs; but it also changed the terrain.

Altered landscapes may be as inevitable as the passing of a generation. Though less severe than those occurring in other high-growth areas of Utah, the west field changes demonstrate that the environment is scarcely more permanent than human existence Both man and nature have altered Cache Valley's landscape. Prior to human habitation, Lake Bonneville inundated the valley. This Pleistocene-era lake occupied nearly 20,000 square miles of present-day northern and central Utah, in large measure determining Cache Valley's subsequent geology and hydrology Gradually, beginning about 12,000 years ago, a predominantly wet, cold climate warmed and dried until the great prehistoric lake shrank to only its present remnant, Great Salt Lake.2

Grasslands dominated Cache Valley's landscape prior to settlement.3 As late as 1830 bison still grazed its extensive range, 4 and native peoples successively occupied or vacated the valley as the climate dictated About 800 years ago, the climate changed from hot and dry to cool and wet, at which point the Shoshoni followed the rains to Cache Valley.5 Historian Brigham D. Madsen characterized the Cache Valley Shoshoni as "one of the most ecologically efficient Indian groups in North America." For eight hundred years the Shoshoni fashioned a livelihood in Cache Valley, successfully adapting to changes in the landscape. Their adaptation to the decline of the bison, for instance, demonstrates the group's extraordinary resourcefulness. The arrival of thousands of settlers, however, was a development that proved insuperable even to the resourceful Shoshoni.6

When Mormons began moving into the Smithfield area in 1859, they realized that they were encroaching upon the Shoshoni. 7 Although Brigham Young and other Mormon leaders instructed these early settlers not to fight but to feed the Indians, conflicts soon developed between the two peoples The Shoshoni responded to Mormon incursion by stealing crops and livestock. The Mormons reacted by sequestering themselves in a fort and in some instances arresting Indian rustlers.8 The conflicts forced the settlers to postpone agricultural development outside the immediate vicinity of the fort.

In the acres of prime farm ground beyond the confines of the fort, those who had settled Smithfield saw a land of unfulfilled potential, an area that they deemed suitable for Zion Traditionally, the Shoshoni used these same areas along the creeks and streams in the west fields as a source of fresh water, shade in the summer, and shelter in the winter.9 For the Shoshoni, Go d had complete d his -work in the west fields. For the Mormons, God's work had just begun. Perhaps, because of their religious enthusiasm, early Smith-field settlers saw their conquest of Cache Valley as being less severe than conquests taking place in other regions But although Mormons may have been motivated by high ideals, the result was still the same for the Shoshoni.

The Shoshoni preference for small, tributary streams was a factor in their removal from Cache Valley O n January 29, 1863, Colonel Patrick Connor, commander of a garrison of California volunteers sent to Utah Territory to guard the overland mail route, attacked the Indians at their winter camp on Beaver Creek (renamed Battle Creek), a small tributary to the Bear River in northwestern Cache Valley. The Battle of Bear River ranks as one of the worst Indian massacres in the history of the western United States, with some accounts placing the number of Indians killed, many of them women and children, as high as 400.10

Mormon settlers did not participate in the massacre. Colonel Connor's removal of Shoshoni resistance, however, allowed the valley's early settlers to move out of their fort and begin developing outlying lands. As with all settlements in Cache Valley, settlers laid out the town of Smithfield in the vicinity of a reliable water source Summit Creek heads high on the western slope of the Bear River Range of the Wasatch Mountains and flows down Smithfield Canyon; in 1860 the pioneers tapped the creek for irrigation to water the lots in town and the adjacent farmland.11 Hundreds of fertile acres remained to be irrigated farther to the west and south, and settlers began developing springs for irrigation as early as 1860 Hopkins Springs, named for early Smithfield settler Ezekial Hopkins, and Merrill and Noble Springs, also named for prominent early Smithfield settlers, irrigated more than 500 acres in the years immediately following the Bear River Massacre.12

In 1870 John and Elizabeth Ann Ainscough Hammer bought and homesteaded land west of Smithfield. They began using a series of unnamed springs that surfaced near, and eventually flowed into, Summit Creek.13 Although the Hammers' original development irrigated only a small area adjacent to the springs, the canal system that still bears their name would, by the early 1890s, be extended west to irrigate more than 300 acres in the vicinity of present-day Benson.14

In 1896 Samuel Fortier first documented what the Hammers and other irrigators in the valley already knew—that Cache Valley is one of the most well-watered areas in Utah. As a professor of civil engineering at the Agricultural College of Utah (now Utah State University), Fortier measured rivers, creeks, and springs in the Utah portion of Cache Valley during the summer of 1896.l3 He hoped to discover what portion of the valley's water supply was unappropriated and therefore available for use. He also hoped, by comparing the amount of inflow into the valley with the amount of outflow, to determine how much of the seepage from irrigation canals and farmland was finding its way back into the Bear River and whether the river's flow actually increased as a result. Fortier may have been the first hydrologist to fully appreciate the interconnectedness of Cache Valley's complex groundwater and surface water network.16 Furthermore, his efforts provide a particularly valuable historic record—the first-known measurements of the various water sources in the valley.

Because at the time of Fortier's reconnaissance the irrigation system in the vicinity of Smithfield had been in operation for more than thirty years, the springs in the west fields probably flowed more than they had before settlement. Drainage and seepage from canals and higher farmland tended to raise the level of groundwater, 'which came to the surface in springs. However, the absence of measurements prior to Fortier's makes it impossible to know with certainty how much the flow had changed.17

Nevertheless, it is know n that in the early years of the twentieth century seepage from higher farm groun d and canals had begun saturating farm ground in the west fields, creating seeps and bogs and, in some cases, flowing springs. In 1916 R.A. Hart, an engineer working for the U. S. Department of Agriculture's Office of Public Roads and Rural Engineering, investigated a tract of land southwest of Smithfield owned by James Roskelly, the grandson of early Smithfield settler and Mormon bishop Samuel Roskelly. Hart noted that "the area was at one time cultivated and was very productive of grain, hay, beets, and potatoes" but was now "largely too wet for cultivation [with] much of it being an almost impassable bog." Hart also noted that the "injury was due to seepage from the irrigation of higher lands."18

Hart supervised the installation of 1,350 feet of tile, with a 400-foot branch lateral, to drain the sixty-five-acre tract. After installation he reported that the drain field developed at least a second-foot of water. "The line was very effective," Hart noted, "draining all the land from the north...and drying up the spring...at the lower manhole."19

By initiating this and other projects in the west fields, farmers and engineers hoped to minimize the damage caused by the inefficiency of earthen canals and flood irrigation. Pioneer farmers had used flood irrigation as the earliest means of bringing water to their land. In addition, the early ditchmakers had generally employed few scientific principles, and they devoted little attention to water conservation Former Utah State Engineer T R Humphreys explained the method used by early irrigators as follows:

The pioneers used wooden plows and ox teams to dig canals, or dug them by hand They had no levels, so they used a Jacob's Staff or a home-made plumb This was a frame 16 by 20 feet, with a stake on each side. One stake was longer than the other, by a measured amount, so as to define the amount of fall needed for water to run downhill A plumb bob was suspended over the center of the frame to achieve the exact measured fall With this device, the canal could be laid off 20 feet at a time.20

Except for the problem of waterlogging, most of the canals and ditches delivered irrigation water reasonably well. Although water engineers usually opposed inefficiency, Hart seemed to realize the potential that the drainage projects held for irrigators on lower lands, and he contended that the water developed from drains more than paid for their cost. O n a subsequent project he reported that the water discharging from the "drains in this locality is very desirable for irrigation and the discharge no doubt will be permanent."21

The permanency of the drains' discharge, however, rested on the continuation of the inefficient system initiated by the valley's pioneer ditch-makers The installation of these drains benefited companies such as the Bench Irrigation Company, which held only secondary water rights at the end of the Bench Canal The company incurred no expense in their installation; higher irrigators who wanted to drain their fields bore that. But because the drains emptied into the closest available natural channel, the water discharged into spring streams and sloughs already used by the company, resulting in a significant windfall

The Bench Canal had originally been built to water lands adjacent to the Merrill and Noble and Hopkins Springs Later, it was extended to water fields to the west. This original extension of the canal had taken place during a period of wet years, which began in the late 1860s and extended through the mid-1870s In particularly wet years, farmers actually found it unnecessary to irrigate Since during these years the original users of the springs had more water than they needed—and in fact had a need to remove water—the farmers below were able to extend the canal water to their land. Many Mormo n farmers attribute d the wet perio d to Providence, and they began looking forward to a time when God 'would so moderate the elements that they would actually be able to plow in the canals and ditches.22

God failed to cooperate, however, and drought returned in the early 1880s. Historian A.J. Simmonds has written extensively on the movement of settlers onto lands along the west side of Cache Valley, particularly on the Big Range (grazing land west of the Bear River) at Cornish and Trenton, during the 1870s By comparing the wet period of the early 1980s with documents from the wet period of the late 1860s and early 1870s, Simmonds discovered that changes in groundwater flow in 1984 may have paralleled conditions during the earlier period. Armed with the original survey maps of U.S Deputy Surveyor Andrew Jackson Stewart, Jr., Simmonds revisited areas where settlers had constructed cabins in the early 1870s and found in 1984 that "almost every place a cabin showed on the 1876 maps, there was now a flowing spring."23 The wet period of the 1870s, then, brought a peak in groundwater flow that the settlers capitalized on by moving onto the otherwise-dry Big Range The subsequent return of dry conditions in the mid-1880s caused the springs to dry up and forced settlers to abandon their claims. Alternating wet and dry periods, then, served to expand and contract agriculture within Cache Valley. If wet conditions were the norm during the 1870s, it is reasonable to assume that the first users of springs in the west fields had a greater need to remove than to use water. Hence, these original appropriators of water probably embraced and advocated the idea of extending the canals to accommodate their neighbors to the •west, in Benson

As they appropriated water, water users in the west fields, as in Utah generally, established themselves as holding either primary or secondary water rights. Utah water law, while still evolving, has always rested upon three basic principles. First, water is a public resource, and appropriators acquire only a right to its use, not absolute ownership. Second, water can be appropriated only for "beneficial use," which means that an appropriator cannot claim more -water than he or she can use for irrigation, stock watering, milling, mining, or domestic use Third, water rights are based on what is expressed in the colloquial phrase: "first in time, first in right." Senior appropriators, those who began using the water first, had the right to use an amount that they could beneficially use before other, junior, appropriators could use the water The initial user, therefore, became the primary, or senior, right-holder; all other users were secondary, or junior, right-holders. County courts (before statehood in 1896) and county commissions (after statehood) distributed the water first to primary users and then to users with the next earliest date of priority In 1901, the State Engineer's Office assumed this responsibility.24

The Bench Irrigation Company, which had begun diverting water from Hopkins Springs and Slough and the Merrill and Noble Springs in 1874, was one of the secondary rights-holders on these two water sources. 25 The individuals wh o had first developed the springs had primary rights Therefore, before the stockholders of the Bench Irrigation Company could hope to receive any water, the primary rights-holders on the springs had to be satisfied.

Water issues in the drainage were made more complex by the rights held by Utah Power and Light. The Kimball Decree, issued in February 1922 by Judge James N. Kimball of the First District Court at Logan, addressed these claims. The case arose when Utah Power and Light Company sought a judgment on water rights with respect to the Bear River and its tributaries.26 In 1912 Utah Power and Light had acquired the hydroelectric rights of the Telluride Power Company and had begun using Bear Lake, which was adjacent to but not physically connected to the Bear River, as a storage reservoir Utah Power and Light connected the lake and the river by building two canals that allowed the company to divert water from the river into the lake and from the lake into the river. In 1917 the company installed a pumping plant on the lake's north shore to more efficiently control the flow of water from the lake to the river. With this development, Utah Power and Light could control the amount of water in the river and successively generate hydroelectric power at five downstream power plants

Since, as Samuel Fortier had supposed and as subsequent researchers confirmed, the flow of Bear River increased dramatically in its meanderings through water-rich Cache Valley, Utah Power and Light desired to know its exact entitlement to Cache Valley's drainage.27 It also sought to establish the priority of its rights against subsequent users, particularly those who had installed electric pumps on the river To establish the priority of its own rights, the company sued all the irrigation companies in the valley. Although the chief concern of Utah Power and Light was to generate power through its "non-consumptive" water rights, in 1912 the company had acquired the earliest consumptive right on the Bear River when it purchased the Utah-Idaho Sugar Company's rights in the Bear River Canal in Box Elder County. The related agreement between the power company and the canal company required Utah Power and Light to deliver a specified amount of water, either the natural flow from the river or storage water from Bear Lake, to the canal company Naturally, rather than paying to pump water from Bear Lake, Utah Power and Light preferred to deliver water that the river picked up in Cache Valley.

In its decree ruling on the power company's rights to this water, the court required each litigant to prove the date on which it had begun utilizing the water beneficially and the amount of water it had historically diverted. However, the decree failed to recommend a standard method by which defendants could measure their irrigation streams. Still, for a fiveyear period the court received testimony, and, according to engineer Frank W Haws, the irrigation company claims were "investigated and verified by" Utah Power and Light. If the power company contested the claims, it could bring a challenge to the court. Although Haws described some of the claims as "vague and meaningless," he also noted that the decree has "weathered [the] storms, [and] never been set aside."28

It is interesting that another wet period preceded the 1922 Kimball Decree.29 Most likely, in order to claim high amounts of water use, irrigators measured their streams during peak flows. If so, the measurements probably reflected higher volumes than would have flowed during normal or dry periods. The Kimball Decree was therefore generous in its allowances of water to irrigators For instance, it allowed the Bench Irrigation Company a combined diversion from the Hopkins Springs and Slough and the Merrill and Noble Springs of eight second-feet, fixing the date of priority at 1874.30

The eight-second-foot figure that the court granted in 1922 has created some contention between shareholders in the Bench Irrigation Company and state water officials; irrigators have been angry when the water in the canal has not matched the amount of water granted in the decree.31 However, even in non-wet years, after the development of extensive drains in the west fields the Bench Canal probably did carry that volume of water at certain times of the year. In October 1896 Samuel Fortier had measured Hopkins Springs and Slough as flowing at 6.5 second-feet, while measurements for the Merrill and Noble Springs showed a flow of 5.8 secondfeet.32 Whe n R A Hart oversaw installation of the drains in 1916, he believed that the return flow would develop three second-feet per mile of drain. So by 1922 this flow from the drains, coupled with the spring flow,33 might well have given the two sources a combined flow of nearly fifteen second-feet

In the interest of better distributing the water from Hopkins Springs, farmers at both the upper and lower portions of the canal worked cooperatively, at least twice a year, to clean the ditch Furthermore, farmers at the canal's tail end often staggered planting their grain and cutting their hay to coincide with senior irrigators' periods of inactivity. Therefore, once senior appropriators had taken their first cutting of hay and were waiting for it to field-dry, junior irrigators watered their pastures or grain Similarly, if those at the lower end of the ditch postponed the planting of grain until two weeks after their neighbors at the top of the ditch had planted, they would not need water until higher irrigators finished.

Although irrigators engaged in a number of efforts to ensure the smoothest possible operation, secondary users of springs in the west fields often experienced either feast or famine Cooperation worked well during those years with favorable weather conditions, but in less favorable years junior water users were compelled to plant promptly, and inevitable conflicts occurred. With construction of a sugar processing plant at Amalga in 1916 and a canning factory at Smithfield in 1918, farmers introduced new crops into their rotations Because sugar beets, peas, and sweet corn required more frequent and timely irrigation, cooperation between senior and junior irrigators began to break down. After 1917, when electricity became available in the areas outlying Smithfield, many of the irrigators at the tail end of the Bench and Hammer canals installed electrically driven pumps along the banks of the Bear River to supplement their water rights on spring sources. 34

Even as the holders of secondary rights had to scramble for water, th e flow of Hopkins Springs and Slough remained fairly constant. In 1925 George Dewey Clyde, workin g for the Agricultural Irrigation Division of the USDA, took measurements Heavy spring precipitation had followed a year of below-normal winter precipitation that year, resulting in very little runoff. The early spring rains, which continued at timely intervals throughout the summer, made it unnecessary to irrigate for much of the season. Less irrigation brought less return flow from seepage, and, according to Clyde, this caused "a marked deficiency in ground water supplies."35 Although Clyde noticed this deficiency in June, he recorded measurements that showed the combined flow of the springs and slough at 6.9 second-feet—more, even, than Fortier's 1896 measurement of 6.5 second-feet Unfortunately, Clyde did not measure the flow of the Merrill and Noble Springs, but they likely also continued to discharge at approximately the same level as they had in 1896.

At this time, the amount of land irrigated by the springs west of Smithfield had not increased or changed appreciably since 1890 The population of Smithfield increased from 1,386 in 1890 to a peak of 2,708 in 1920. Thereafter, the population declined to 2,383 in 1950. Throughout this period, the flow of springs in the west fields remained constant, even though a considerable number of artesian wells had been developed in the aquifers of Cache Valley Prior to 1920, only about 400 wells had been driven, with most of these near Logan, the county seat.36 But by 1946, when William Peterson, director of the Utah Cooperative Extension Service, surveyed the groundwater resources of Cache Valley, he identified more than 1,200 wells in the Utah portion of the valley Peterson stated his reasons for conducting the survey as follows:

This study has been prompted by the general acceptance that CacheValley is interpreted through its geologic history and the hundreds of flowing wells already developed to be an ideal artesian basin, with large promise of additional underground water development However, many believe development already has gone to or beyond full capacity Hundreds of home-owners in the valley have driven wells for domestic use and in the past ten years many wells have ceased to flow, compelling their deepening or the installation of pumps Larger wells have been driven for irrigation purposes, and their large flow has been interpreted as a direct cause of the reduced flow of the upper wells near the fringe of the artesian basin.37

Even with increased withdrawal from wells—few of which, admittedly, -were in the vicinity of the west field springs—the springs continued to flow at or near their previous levels. Peterson monitored the Hopkins Springs apart from the discharge of the slough and reported that it flowed at 3.7 second-feet In calling attention to the importance of return flow from irrigation and drainage, he also noted that the slough and springs combined could flow anywhere from eight second-feet to thirty-second feet.38

The inefficient use of water resources—through flood irrigation and earthen canals—continued to supply the springs, seeps, and drains in Smithfield's west fields with a consistent discharge as late as 1968 This was true even though drought afflicted northern Utah between 1952 and 1968, with twelve out of sixteen years producing below-average precipitation.39 Furthermore, by 1970 the population of Smithfield had increased 33 percent Despite these combined developments, in 1968 the U.S Geological Survey reported a consistent flow from Hopkins Springs.40

Between 1968 and 1990, the year in which the Survey next measured the flow of springs in Cache Valley, dramatic changes occurred in the groundwater system. The streams arising from the flow of Hopkins Springs and the Merril l and Nobl e Springs were noticeably diminished Furthermore, as each irrigation season progressed, the usual increase in flow from the drain fields did not materialize.41 As a result of return flow and seepage from higher irrigation, the drain fields and springs had usually reached their peak flow in late summer But rather than increasing in output, many of the drains began drying up Although drought had again struck northern Utah, drought alone cannot explain the sudden decrease in the flow of Hopkins Springs, a source that had until 1990 survived periods of drought and remained remarkably consistent.42

Municipal water development may account partly for the springs' decline. Population increased by more than 133 percent in Smithfield between 1950 and 1990, requiring an increase in groundwater withdrawals Furthermore, neighboring Hyde Park and North Logan, which also drew groundwater from the same aquifer, grew by 240 percent and 600 percent, respectively.43 In just three years, from 1987 to 1990, the towns and cities between Hyrum, in the southern part of the valley, and Smithfield increased their withdrawal of groundwater from 3,800 to 8,746 acre-feet annually. However, hydrologists traditionally have contended that a major source of groundwater recharge comes from unconsumed irrigation -water.44 The highly inefficient use of water resources in Cache Valley kept the flow of springs and spring streams relatively constant until 1990

During this period, most canals near Smithfield had efficiency ratings of less than 70 percent, while on-farm laterals rated only about 40 percent. For years, water engineers expressed concern over this perceived wastefulness, 45 and Utahns always have considered the conservation of water resources paramount Accordingly, Smithfield Irrigation Company laid plans for installing a pressurized sprinkler system in the early 1970s. At least fifteen years elapsed, however, before the company surmounted formidable economic and physical barriers and completed the project. When the new system finally did became operational, farmers and irrigation company managers began plowing in the canals and ditches The newly planted grass had hardly taken root where the ditches once ran before many of the drains in the west fields stopped flowing. Subsequently, the springs in the west fields began discharging less. Wet areas and bogs began disappearing from fields, cattails died, and songbirds left In the years following the conversion, land previously used only for pasture would be cultivated in grain and alfalfa, and it would be watered from above instead of from below.46 During the drought years of the early 1990s, the U.S. Geological Survey measured the Hopkins Springs' flow at less than 1.5 cubic feet per second, less than half of what it had consistently flowed the previous eighty-six years Even with the return of normal precipitation during the rest of the decade, the springs in the west fields have yet to regain their previous consistency.47

Cache Valley's agricultural development has always been contingent on water Wet periods brought expansion while dry periods brought contraction Although the wet years of the 1870s helped make possible the initial settlement of Benson,48 increased groundwater sources from the west field drains further contributed to the settlement process. The Bench Irrigation Company, exploiting the increase in groundwater through spring sources and drains in the west fields, benefited most from the inefficient irrigation practices of higher irrigators. But those benefits vanished when higher irrigators began irrigating with sprinklers. During several of the ensuing years, the Bench Irrigation Company has failed to even clean the ditch of weeds and debris in anticipation of receiving an irrigation stream

Canals and ditches have long been regarded as a distinctive part of Utah's landscape. "The roadside irrigation ditches are characteristic of virtually all Mormon villages," wrote Richard V Francaviglia in 1978. They are "a symbol vividly demonstrating that the entire town is dependent for its very life on the irrigation water coursing down from the mountains."49 Yet east of the point where the Hopkins Springs flow to the surface, most of the ditches and canals have vanished from the west fields today. The ditches that once conveyed water to city lots have been plowed in as well, bringing a substantive change to what had been a traditional part of Smithfield's landscape.

In Smithfield, as in many other towns, pipes and sprinklers have replaced the customary roadside ditch. But landscape is never static. In Cache Valley, it has undergone drastic change. O n the foothills and benches, the visible shoreline stages of Lake Bonneville are a reminder of just how dramatic those changes have been Compared with geologic change, human impact upon the landscape is minimal. Nevertheless, since settlement that impact has been constant. By the year 2020, water engineers estimate, Cache County will need an additional 15,000 acre-feet of water for increased municipal and industrial needs.50 Furthermore, as other irrigation companies convert from flood irrigation to sprinkler irrigation, and as farm land is developed for housing and commercial interests, less water will be applied to the surface of the land. As asphalt and concrete replace agricultural land, landowners will sell or transfer their irrigation stock to municipalities This seemingly inescapable dilemma of modern society will result in less recharge to the groundwater system, and as recharge of the aquifer subsides, the springs in the west fields may cease to flow entirely. As with previous changes in the west fields, their absence will certainly diminish the landscape.

NOTES

Robert Parson is the university archivist for Utah State University The author would like to thank John Walters, USU documents librarian, for his invaluable comments.

1 This was particularly true of the Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield Canal, which headed at the mouth of Logan Canyon In its meanderings along the mountain slope and over the gravel benches, the canal was said to lose nearly half of its diverted capacity See Samuel Fortier, The Water Supply of Cache Valley, Bulletin no. 50,Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Logan, Utah, 1896, 19.

2 Around 15,000 B.C., the lake had breached Red Rock Pass in southern Idaho, an event that quickly lowered the lake more than 300 feet and shrank it to 14,400 square miles

3 A.C Hull and Mary Kay Hull,"PresettlementVegetation of CacheValley, Utah and Idaho," Journal of Range Management 27 Qanuary 1974):29

4 Ibid., 27

5 Brigham D Madsen, The Northern Shoshoni (Caldwell, Idaho:Caxton Printers, 1980) 17-18

6 Brigham D Madsen, The Shoshoni Frontier and the Bear River Massacre (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1985), 15

7 Joel E Ricks, ed., History of a Valley: Cache Valley, Utah-Idaho (Logan: Cache Valley Centennial Commission, 1956), 32-59 "Mormons" refers to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (also referred to as LDS).

8 On July 23, 1860, as the settlers in Smithfield prepared for the following day's pioneer celebration, a band of Shoshonis descended upon the settlement with the intent of freeing one of their members who had been incarcerated for horse stealing A gunfight ensued between the Shoshonis and the settlers standing guard The Indian prisoner was killed, and one of the guards was wounded As the Shoshonis made their escape to higher ground they opened fire on two settlers from another community who had stopped by the banks of Summit Creek for lunch One of the men,John Reed, was killed Further on, the small force of Shoshonis met two more settlers, who were returning from the canyons with a load of logs.The Indians again opened fire, killing Ira Merrill and wounding his brother Solyman See Olsen and Olsen, The History of Smithfield (Smithfield, Utah: City of Smithfield, 1927), 13-15.

9 Interview with J Cash Smith,July 1990 Mr Smith, whose home is on land originally homesteaded by John and Elizabeth Hammer, has found countless arrowheads and grinding stones adjacent to Summit Creek Furthermore, dairy farmer LaMar Tarbet encountered several artifacts while excavating a corn silage pit adjacent to the Hopkins Slough in Benson, Utah These finds would indicate that the Shoshoni frequented these sites

10 Newell Hart, The Bear River Massacre: Being a Complete Source Book and Story Book of the Genocidal Action Against the Shoshones in 1863 and Gen. P.E. Connor and How He Related to and Dealt with the Indians and Mormons on the Western Frontier (Preston, Idaho: Cache Valley Newsletter Publishing Co., 1983), 18384 A more accurate number is between 250 and 300

11 Settlers also diverted a portion of Logan River, which heads in the same general area as Summit Creek but flows to the south and west down Logan Canyon Samuel Roskelly of Smithfield, along with settlers from Hyde Park, Logan, and Richmond, formed the Logan and Richmond Irrigation Company and in 1864 commenced building a canal to divert water from the Logan River and convey it north to Richmond Additionally, the Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield Canal was also eventually extended north along the bench line between Logan and Smithfield, paralleling the Logan and Richmond Canal; it was used to irrigate lands at Hyde Park and Smithfield See Samuel Fortier,"Irrigation in Cache:Arrival of the Pioneers and Development of the Present Irrigation System," Logan Journal, July 20, 1897, in Leonard J Arrington, A Sourcebook on the Economic History of Cache Valley, prepared for the Cache Valley Historical Society, May 1956,181 Copy in Special Collections and Archives,Utah State University, Logan, Utah

12 In the District Court of the First Judicial District of the State of Utah in and for the County of Cache, Utah Power and Light Company, plaintiff, vs Richmond Irrigation Company et al., defendants, Final Decree, Before Hon.James N. Kimball, District Judge, February 21, 1922, 31-32. Hereafter referred to as Kimball Decree

13 Smithfield Diaries,MS collection 34:2:12,Special Collections and Archives,Utah State University.

14 Kimball Decree

15 Fortier, The Water Supply of Cache Valley, 1

16 The complexity of CacheValley's geologic formations makes it particularly difficult to chart the flow of groundwater, as Fortier discovered More recently, Robert Q Oaks has contended that the long-held assumption that all groundwater within Cache Valley is interconnected and eventually flows to the Bear River is invalid for some areas of the valley See Robert Q Oaks, Subsurface Cenozoic Deposits: Baseline for Stratigraphic and Structural Interpretations of Southern Cache Valley, Utah, with Applications to Groundwater in Tuffaceous Sediments of Tertiary Age (Logan: Department of Geology, Utah State University, 1997), 7 Nevertheless, Oaks allows that for the area between Smithfield and Hyrum the assumption is probably correct

17 Although there are no known scientific surveys prior to Fortier's, there are hints that waterlogging in the west fields was a problem during the nineteenth century Dick Smith, who was born at Smithfield in 1882, stated that his family had some land west of town that "had the water come up in it,"which created difficulties in planting and harvesting crops See interview with Dick Smith, contained in Charles S Peterson and Glen Bailey, "Cache Valley Farmers: Some Social Profiles, 1890-1915," prepared for the Ronald V Jensen Historical Farm (September 11, 1979), 3, Special Collections and Archives, Utah State University

18 R A Hart, "Report of the Drainage of Tract #1, Smithfield, Utah" (Berkeley, CA: U S Office of Public Roads and Rural Engineering, Drainage Division, 1916), 1

19 Ibid., 5 A "second-foot" of water refers to one cubic foot per second (cfs) One cfs is a flow of 448 gallons per minute, or 646,272 gallons per day

20 Proceedings and Papers of the Cache Valley Historical Society," vol 3 (1953-1954), 114, contained in the Cache Valley Historical Society Collection, MS collection 43,Special Collections and Archives, Utah State University J William Hyde related how the Smithfield and Hyde Park Canal was laid out in the vicinity of Hyde Park, south of Smithfield: "They dug it in I860...the year they came out here...with one team of horses and shovels All they had [was] a plow, team.,.and shovels No engineering instruments They had a Brother Lamb [that would] sight it He'd sight if the water could go a block, ifhe thought it [was] level, why they'd go that way Then if the land fell that way, he'd go there, ifit fell back here That's why the ditch don't go straight. It'd fall, then have to go the other way to get up enough speed to make it up the hill." See interview with J William Hyde, August 13,1979, in Peterson and Bailey, "Cache Valley Farmers: Some Social Profiles," 25

21 R A Hart,"Drainage ofSmithfield Tract # 3"(Berkeley, CA: U S Office ofPublic Roads and Rural Engineering, Drainage Division, 1916),6

22 Whether or not Mormons ascribed to the rain-follows-the-plow theory, they were adamantly convinced that God would intercede with nature on their behalf. See Henry Nash Smith, "Rain Follows the Plow: The Notion of Increased Rainfall for the Great Plains" in Huntington Library Quarterly 10:182-84 and "Gleanings from H-West: Rain Follows the Plow" in Montana: Tlie Magazine of Western History 49:4 (1999),92-95

23 Logan HeraldJournal, July 2, 1984

24 Frank W Haws, A Critical Analysis of Water Rights and Institutional Factors and Their Effect on the Development of Logan River (Logan: Utah State University, 1965), 72-73 See also Wells A Hutchins and DallinW.Jensen, The Utah Law of Water Rights (Salt Lake City:State Engineer's Office, 1965),3

25 Kimball Decree,33.

26 Ibid., 1-9

27 In 1925 George D Clyde conducted research on the Bear River and concluded that the river gained at least 100 second-feet of flow in Cache County. See George Dewey Clyde, "Hydrographic Studies on the Bear River in Cache Valley From June 15-September 15, 1925," George D Clyde papers, MS collection 176:1:5,Special Collections and Archives,Utah State University.

28 Haws, A Critical Analysis of Water Rights, 97 The decree has been often challenged by both irrigators and Utah Power and Light; disputes have been worked out through the office of the State Engineer Because the decree granted Utah Power and Light priority rights on groundwater seeping into the Bear River, municipal rights are secondary to those of the power company Municipalities drawing from the groundwater must replace it with some other source of water; as a result, the pressure to build dams on the Bear has been strong

29 Norman E. Stauffer, Jr., "Lake Stages of the Great Salt Lake," MS 698, Special Collections and Archives,Utah State University As the final destination for all the drainage of CacheValley,the level of the Great Salt Lake is a good indicator ofjust how wet or dry the climate is. In about 1923 the lake reached an elevation of 4,205 feet above sea level,its highest elevation between the 1870s and 1980s,when it again approached the mid-1870s level of 4,211.5 feet

30 The Bench Irrigation Company had re-channeled these streams,which originally flowed in different directions, into the Bench Canal.

31 Minutes of the Bench Irrigation Company,January 7, 1990 Record in possession of the company's secretary,Benson, Utah.

32 Fortier, The Water Supply of Cache Valley, 40

33 Hart,"Drainage of Smithfield Tract # 3,"6

34 This action has become a matter of contention When the irrigators installed the pumps, they neglected to change the points of diversion from the springs to the river; therefore, they lost their original date of priority, and the date of their rights became the date they began pumping from the river These former senior rights holders then became junior to Utah Power and Light In the late 1980s, at the insistence of UP&L, these irrigators had to begin paying for the water they pumped when it became necessary to augment the flow of the Bear River with storage water from Bear Lake.

35 Clyde,"Hydrographic Studies on the Bear River in CacheValley."

36 Statistical Abstract of Utah, 1973 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah), 31;William Peterson, "Ground Water Supply in Cache Valley, Utah, Available for Domestic Use and Irrigation," New Circular Series no 133 (Logan: Utah Cooperative Extension Service, 1946), 62-101

37 Peterson,"Groundwater Supply," 1

38 Ibid., 23-24

39 William J Alder,"Climate of Salt Lake City, UT," NOAA Technical Memorandum, NWS WR-152 (Salt Lake City: NationalWeather Service Forecast Office, 1996),53

40 L.J. McGreevy and L.J. Bjorkland, "Selected Hydrologic Data: Cache Valley, Utah and Idaho," Utah Basic-Data Release 21 (Salt Lake City: U.S Geological Survey, 1970), 18

41 Farmers along the Bench and Hammer canals, as well as primary appropriators of the spring sources, all noticed the declining flow of groundwater in the west fields.

42 Wendell Munk, conversation with the author Mr Munk, who is now eighty-four years old, has farmed and lived in Benson his entire life As a neighbor, the author has had many opportunities to discuss the irrigation systems in the area with Mr Munk The drought that occurred in 1934 has been characterized as the worst in recorded Utah history Nonetheless, farmers along the Bench Canal and the Hammer Canal, according to Mr Munk, continued to irrigate using the spring streams granted them by the Kimball Decree Although there was less available water, they survived the period better than did many of the farmers who relied upon the flow from Summit Creek, Logan River, or Bear River During the summer of 1934, Governor Henry Blood appointed a water conservation committee that met with local irrigation companies in an attempt to find additional sources of water and to mediate conflicts As the summer progressed, state officials began curtailing the use of pumps on Bear River in CacheValley because the irrigators all had junior rights to the Bear River Canal Company in Box Elder County.When state water officials arrived at the pump site of the Riverside Pump and Irrigation Company, however, they were met by the company's secretary, Clarence Homer Homer informed the state officials that the company's rights were not on the Bear River but on spring sources in the west fields, and although the pumping plant had been installed in 1917, they continued to draw water from both sources As a result, the Riverside Company's pump was the only one allowed to operate, unabated, in 1934 SeeTwentieth Biennial Report of the State Engineer to the Governor of Utah for the Bienniumjuly 1,1934, toJune 30, 1936, 68

43 1990 Census Brief: Cities and Counties of Utah (Salt Lake City: Utah Office of Planning and Budget, 1991), 10-12

44 Kim A Kariya, D Michael Roark, and Karen M Hanson, Hydrology of Cache Valley, Cache County, Utah, and Adjacent Part of Idaho, with Emphasis on Simulation of Ground- Water Flow (Salt Lake City: Utah Department of Natural Resources, 1994), 27, 54 See also Orson W Israelsen, Cleve H Milligan, and A Alvin Bishop, Needs For and Methods of Drainage: Logan-Hyde Park-Benson Area, Utah, Special Report no. 11 (Logan: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station),25.

45 "Working Paper: Irrigation Conveyance System Inventory Summary, Bear River Basin, Idaho-UtahWyoming, for Bear River Basin Type IV Study" (U.S Soil Conservation Service, 1976), 82-85; Frank W Haws,"Summary Report On Project 211:Lining of Irrigation Canals and Reservoirs" (Utah Agricultural Experiment Station miscellaneous report, 18.16:63 no 56), 16, Special Collections and Archives, Utah State University.

46 Conversation with Jeff Gittens, current president of the Smithfield Irrigation Company,January 29, 1998. The conversion from the old system to the new pressurized system was not without contention. Many of the older farmers in the area objected to the high price tag of conversion Some irrigators became disenchanted with the progress being made on the new system and proposed separating from the Smithfield Irrigation Company to form their own company Furthermore, when the new system did become operational the timing corresponded with the onset of drought, and Summit Creek, the system's main source of water, was insufficient to fully meet the demands of the irrigators Initially, the company's wells, which were used to augment the flow of Summit Creek during low water periods, were not plumbed into the system.This caused further confusion and contention among some of the shareholders until the wells were brought online The company also had some particularly complex arrangements for exchanges with water users on Birch Creek (a tributary to Summit Creek) and with the Logan, Hyde Park and Smithfield Canal; these took a few seasons to work out According to Mr Gittens, however, the bugs have been worked out, and the system now operates very well

47 D Michael Roark and Karen M Hanson, "Selected Hydrologic Data for Cache Valley, Utah and Idaho, 1969-1991,"Utah Hydrologic-Data Report 48 (Salt Lake City: U.S Geological Survey, 1992), 60 Secondary users of spring streams in CacheValley were not the only ones in Utah to feel the sting of efficiency In 1992 the Utah Supreme Court decided a case that involved a suit brought by a holder of a secondary water right against a holder of a primary water right. In Steed vs. New Escalante Irrigation Company, the court ruled that a primary irrigator had the right to upgrade and make more efficient its irrigation system (in this case a conversion from flood irrigation to pressurized sprinkler irrigation) even though the upgrade deprived the secondary right holder of his irrigation stream See David B Hartvigsen,"Water and the Law:Efficiency of Use vs Subsequent Re-Use," Utah Water News, November 6, 1992,4

48 The area that is now referred to as Benson was at one time divided into two areas The upper portion, that area closest to the west fields, was originally known as King, after the name of the post office Later, the residents of this area referred to their community as Riverside, a name used to differentiate between the two school districts After the Riverside School and the Benson School were consolidated, both the upper and lower portions were simply referred to as Benson

49 RichardV Francaviglia, The Mormon Landscape: Existence, Creation, and Perception of a Unique Image in the American West (NewYork:AMS Press,Inc., 1978), 13-14