Deer Creek Dam, Spanning the Provo River at the intersection of U.S. Highway 189 & Deer Creek Reservoir, Charleston

Source document Quoted word for word from HAER UT-93. Not written, edited or summarised by this site.

Intersection of U.S. Highway 189 and Deer Creek Reservoir, Charleston vicinity, Wasatch County, Utah. Quad: Aspen Grove, Utah:1993; Charleston, Utah:1993. UTM: Zone 12 A: mE mN B: mE 44 mN C: mE 44 mN D: mE mN Date of Construction:

Source document Quoted word for word from HAER UT-93. Not written, edited or summarised by this site.

The Deer Creek Dam continues as a key feature of the Provo River Project to maintain a supplemental water supply for agricultural and domestic use in Wasatch, Utah, and Salt Lake Counties. The Deer Creek Reservoir formed by the dam feeds the 42-mile-long Salt Lake Aqueduct and its Terminal Reservoir. A hydroelectric power plant at the dam generates as much as kilowatts that is locally distributed.

Source document Quoted word for word from HAER UT-93. Not written, edited or summarised by this site.

Constructed between and the Deer Creek Dam was constructed as the key structure of the Bureau of Reclamation's Provo River Project, the largest water resource development project undertaken in Utah. It was the second largest earth fill dam constructed by Reclamation at the time, and Reclamation's first project intended to provide domestic water. The Provo River Project followed a precedent of 40 Federal reclamation projects that had been or were nearly completed by Its construction was during a significant period of accelerated American infrastructure development Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 2) founded on technological investment intended to make the West a sustainable, viable, and profitable landscape.

For additional information regarding the construction of the Deer Creek Dam, refer to "Deer Creek Dam CCC Government Camp," HABS No. UT-137. Project Statement: This HAER project was undertaken by the Utah Department of Transportation in order to document the historic features of the dam prior to the realignment and improvement of U. S. Highway 189 in the area. Preparation for construction of the Deer Creek portion has been underway since the and the work is expected to begin in The field work, site plan, historical reports, and photographs were prepared by Alpine Archaeological Consultants, Inc., Montrose, Colorado. Jonathon C. Horn served as the Principal Investigator, and Gianfranco Archimede conducted the fieldwork, historic research, large-format photography, and report preparation.

Source document Quoted word for word from HAER UT-93. Not written, edited or summarised by this site.

Gianfranco Archimede, Alpine Archaeological Consultants, Inc., April Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 3) A.

History

The Deer Creek Dam was constructed between and as the key structure of the Bureau of Reclamation's 7 million Provo River Project, the largest water resource development project undertaken in Utah. It was the second largest earth fill dam constructed by Reclamation at the time, slightly exceeded by the Vallecito Dam of the Pine River Project in Colorado. The need for an agricultural/residential reservoir system for the developing Provo and Salt Lake City areas was identified as early as and culminated in the approval of the Provo River Project by President Franklin D.

Roosevelt in Selection of the dam site in Provo Canyon, 16 miles northeast of Provo, required flooding of a 23-mile-long reservoir basin and the relocation of both the Heber City Branch of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad and U.S. Highway 189 situated within the basin. The 1,300-foot-long, 155-foot-tall earthen dam and its reservoir provided for the supplemental irrigation of acres of farmlands in Salt Lake, Wasatch, and Utah Counties, and for a domestic water source via the 42- mile-long Salt Lake City Aqueduct used in the Orem, Provo, and Salt Lake City areas. The Deer Creek Government Camp (HABS No.

UT-137) was established in southwest of the damsite to house Civilian Conservation Corps workers who conducted the preliminary clearing and excavation of the damsite in addition to highway and railroad relocation work. Although the camp was disbanded in following the completion of the dam, the housing area continued to be used for dam keepers and their families. The Provo River Project followed a precedent of 40 Federal reclamation projects that had been or were nearly completed by Its construction was during a significant period of accelerated American infrastructure development founded on technological investment intended to make the West a sustainable, viable, and profitable landscape. B.

Deer Creek Dam Construction Chronology

The need for water storage in the Provo area was demonstrated by the efforts oflocal farmers to consolidate water rights as early as Realizing the economic importance of a consistent water supply, several small dams were built with private capital. Larger projects, however, were not attempted due to a lack of funding and engineering support. An organization was formed in which filed applications for surveys of likely reservoir locations. As interest and support for these activities continued, the organization became the nucleus of the Utah Water Storage Commission created by the state legislature in The Commission was charged with Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 4) development and conservation planning of Utah's water supply in cooperation with other federal, state, and local agencies.

1 Ten damsite surveys, including geological and engineering studies, for the Provo River Project were conducted beginning in under a joint agreement between the Utah Water Storage Commission and the Bureau of Reclamation. Severe drought conditions between and reduced the region's main irrigation water supply in Utah Lake from acre-feet to acre-feet, accentuating the urgent need to move from planning the Provo River Project to constructing it. In Reclamation submitted a proposal for the construction of a dam across the Provo River just upstream of its confluence with Deer Creek to create a reservoir capable of holding acre-feet of water fed by diversions from other nearby watersheds.

Obtaining Congressional approval for the project first required the formation of two necessary entities: the Provo Water Users Association, organized in May of and the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City, organized the following August. The purpose of these organizations was to negotiate the repayment of contracts between Reclamation and the water users. 2 President Franklin D. Roosevelt approved the Provo River Project on November 16, Repayment, water subscription, relocation contracts, legal issues, and reservoir land appraisals/acquisitions were conducted over the next two years. The relocation of miles of the Heber City Branch of the Denver and Rio Grande Wes tern Railroad along the western shoreline of the resulting Deer Creek Reservoir was necessary.

Upon completion of the dam, it was also necessary to relocate U.S. Highway 189 to run across the crest of the dam and along the eastern shore of the reservoir for 9 .1 miles to the town of Charleston. 3 Clearing of the damsite at Deer Creek in Provo Canyon was completed by Civilian Conservation Corps forces by the end of January followed by foundation testing for the valve house structure in February. Bids for the dam's construction and highway and railroad relocations were opened on February 11, and awarded on April 11 to the Rohl-Connolly Company of Los Angeles for their low bid of 4 1 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Project History: Provo River Project- Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. II, submitted by E. 0.

Larson, Construction Engineer (Provo, UT: Bureau of Reclamation), p. 2 Tina M. Bell, "Provo River Project, Historic Reclamation Project Book," second draft. Bureau of Reclamation DataWeb website, I I dataweb. usbr.gov I provoriv.html, p. 3. 3 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. II, p. 4 Ibid., p. 20. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 5) The contractor began by setting up a base camp and construction plant downstream of the darnsite. Before large-scale work on the dam's foundation and spillway could begin, it was necessary to divert the Provo River and the highway. The diversion of the river was accomplished by constructing the already-planned outlet tunnel/valve works in the east abutment and running the river through it.

The outlet tunnel's penstocks, outlet control gates, and valves were installed as the dam's final construction phase. The highway diversion required construction of a temporary, wood-deck stringer bridge just downstream of the darnsite and excavation of a temporary 1-mile-long roadway along the east side of the damsite, which connected to the new highway section along the east shore of the reservoir built by the Utah State Highway Cornrnission. 5 The contractor diverted the river feet upstream of the darn foundation into an old channel along the east side of the canyon toward the tunnel's inlet. The channel was improved to increase its grade and capacity in order to efficiently handle the full flow of the river.

6 Excavation of the foot-long outlet tunnel began at the upstream end on June 6, and on the downstream end on July 7. The tunnel was broken through on August 6 and its concrete lining was started later that month. By the end of the tunnel lining and the concrete substructure of the outlet works were completed. Construction of the temporary stringer bridge and excavation for both the temporary and permanent highways upstream of the damsite began in July and were completed by year's end. 7 Stripping work on the upstream portions of both darn abutments and the river bottom also began during the surnrner. The abutments are the geological features of the damsite that make up the east and west ends of the darn.

The compacted earth fill comprising the central portion of the darn is anchored to the sides of the darnsite by the two abutments. Stripping of the abutments and river bottom was necessary to sculpt them appropriately and to remove excessive and unstable surface material. The stripping work was 65 percent complete by the close of the year and the cubic yards of material taken from the stripping was deposited upstream in such a way as to create a smooth reservoir bed. 8 Twelve-inch-diameter drainage pipes were laid at the downstream toe of the dam's east abutment and the appropriate rock fill used as cover. The foundation trench for the upstream concrete cutoff wall was s Ibid., p. 55. 6 Ibid., p. 57. 7 Ibid., p. 59, 63. s Ibid., p. 59. Deer Creek Dam HAER No.

UT-93 (page 6) also begun during the summer. The two cutoff walls in the Deer Creek Dam function similarly to the abutments by providing solid anchor points between the fill portion of the dam and the river bottom. The main cutoff wall runs along the axis of the dam. The second cutoff wall runs parallel to the main wall under the toe of the upstream embankment. The massive cutoff walls are of concrete and their foundations are laid directly into the bedrock below the river bottom. Planned relocation of the railroad grade began about one mile downstream of the damsite and rejoined the original grade 8 miles upstream of the dam, following the contour of the reservoir's west shoreline.

Most of the clearing work for the first mile of the new grade was accomplished during June and July of Excavation and rough grading began in August and was pushed vigorously. By year's end, all excavation work was 70 percent complete. Track laying and finishing work, consisting of sloping and fine grading, were left for the following spring. A temporary timber trestle was erected across Snake Creek on the north end of the reservoir near Heber City, and 59 steel pipe culverts were placed along the new grade. 9 The contractor's construction goal for was to complete the work necessary for diversion of the river, highway, and railroad so that construction of the major cutoff trenches and dam foundation could move forward.

The outlook at the beginning of the season for all of this to happen was discouraging due to the interdependence of the river and railroad diversion projects. The 85-foot-deep cutoff wall trench had to be excavated, concrete poured and cured, then backfilled before cold weather set in late in the year. If the trench was not backfilled, the exposed concrete would be subject to damage and change over the winter. Before deep excavation of the cutoff trench could commence, diversion of the river needed to be accomplished. The cubic yards of backfill for the cutoff trench was to come from the excavation of the new railroad grade through the North Deer Creek borrow pit.

If the rail grade excavation commenced before the cutoff trench was ready to be backfilled, the material would have to be stockpiled and, therefore, handled twice. The tasks had to be completed sequentially, not simultaneously, which made for an extremely tight schedule. The construction schedule was met by increasing the equipment and labor force, and working three shifts almost continuously. 10 9 Ibid., p. 22, 57, 61, 63. 10 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. III, p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 7) Favorable weather and a low runoff year greatly helped completion of the river diversion much earlier than anticipated, and a long summer allowed for earthmoving, ballast and track laying later than expected.

Work was not stopped on account of cold weather until late December, leaving the completed work well protected until the next spring. The intake structure, trash rack, gate chamber, concrete flume section, valve house substructure, tailrace stilling basin, and riprap embankments of the outlet works were all completed during the spring of allowing for the diversion of the Provo River on May 30. The next day, excavation of the main cutoff trench resumed from where it had been left the previous year. Excavation was carried out by two Northwest draglines of 21h and 11h-yard capacities, and a fleet of 5-yard Koehring dump trucks. This equipment was later supplemented by another 21h-yard Link Belt dragline and 7-yard Mack trucks.

Twelve-yard carry-all scrapers, drawn by Caterpillar tractors, were needed later in order to bring material up the slippery ramp from the bottom of the trench. All the while, water was continuously pumped from the trench at an average of 6 cubic feet per second by strategically placed sumps in the bottom of the trench. This method worked well straight through the concrete pouring and backfilling stages. The completed cutoff trench was 800 feet long, 30 feet wide at the bottom with sloping sides, and 85 feet deep, extending 4 to 8 feet into the bedrock. cubic yards of sand, gravel, and clay removed from the trench were stockpiled for other applications. Concrete aggregates for the dam were brought in by rail under a separate government contract from Nash, Utah, 40 miles from the damsite.

The concrete was mixed on-site and cured according to Reclamation standards. Concrete for the cutoff wall was delivered into the forms through an improvised system of steel chutes and pipes. Backfilling with material from the railroad grade excavations at the North Deer Creek borrow pit commenced on October 19. Backfilling of the cutoff trench and all other river bottom foundation work was completed by the end of November .11 Other dam construction completed during included work on the upstream and downstream sloped sides of the dam, called the dam embankments, and preparation of the stilling basin at the end of the spillway. Half of the concrete work on the walls and floor of the stilling basin was also completed before cold weather stopped construction during December.

Concrete for the stilling basin was delivered into the forms by a 1-cubic-yard bucket suspended from a 60-foot-tall crane. Traffic over the 1-mile-long temporary highway diversion commenced on August 14 and all other main 11 Ibid., p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 8) highway work, including guardrails, was completed except for the portion that was to run across the crest of the completed dam. Excavation work for the relocation of the railroad grade recommenced from April to June, when equipment was put to work on the dam cutoff trench.

Railroad grading, ballasting, track laying, and structure work was completed by early November, except for the portion running through the North Deer Creek borrow pit, which was hurriedly completed in December, allowing the first traffic over the new alignment on December 27, 12 The contractor's goal for the construction season was to push the work schedule forward in an attempt to finish the project by the end of Construction of dam embankments and the spillway, and completion of the outlet works remained. With the river bottom work completed, the highway and railroad diversions complete, and the Provo River diverted, it was possible to advance the schedule as planned.

Removal of the old railroad grade within the reservoir basin began at the end of February and embankment work slowly commenced at the end of March. Work on the cutoff walls was completed and grouted, as was the little stripping of the dam abutments that remained. As the weather improved by mid-April, three shifts were at work on the embankments with three steam shovels and numerous trucks until work was suspended for the winter in November. Most of the material for the embankments was excavated from the North Deer Creek and Weeks' borrow pits west of the damsite. Moisture conditioning of the materials was limited to surfaces of compacted layers on the embankments. Most of the excavated materials were already optimum for compaction.

Mechanical tampers were used in areas that were inaccessible to compacting rollers. Rock fill for the downstream embankment consisted mostly of "oversize" cobbles screened from material excavated at the Weeks' borrow pit where a large, semi-automatic screening plant was erected for this purpose. Rock riprap formed the top layer of the embankments, taken from the borrow pit adjacent to the west abutment. The embankments were raised 85 feet during requiring a total of cubic yards of earth fill, cubic yards of rock fill, and cubic yards of riprap.

13 Due to unusually low water in the Provo River during late July, it was possible to route the water running through the outlet tunnel into a temporary conduit installed under the gate chamber and tunnel floor so that the outlet works could be completed. Virtually all work on the outlet works 12 Ibid., p. 13 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. N, p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 9) was completed by the end of 14 Work on the spillway in the west abutment resumed in March. The stilling basin and lower chute section on the downstream side, including backfilling and placement of riprap, was completed by July. Excavation of the inlet and gate structure on the upstream side took place simultaneously.

Forms were built and concrete poured by crane bucket and chutes between July and November. The spillway gates were assembled and set in place, but final construction and backfilling of the inlet and gate structure was left for the following season. The 953-foot-long open chute section between the gate structure and the stilling basin was left unfinished to allow for trucks to pass freely for embankment work. By the end of cubic yards of earth had been excavated for the spillway, and cubic yards of concrete had been poured, leaving the spillway 75 percent complete. 15 Construction goals for were to complete the dam before cold weather set in.

By this point, the dam was 85 percent complete; cubic yards of embankment materials had been placed, the outlet works, control valves and valve house structure were complete, and a small amount of work remained for completion of the spillway. A minor amount of ballasting remained on the new railroad grade, and the temporary highway diversion was complete. Embankment work did not resume until March, due to severe weather conditions at the beginning of the year. Steam shovels, excavators, and trucks worked three shifts throughout the summer to bring the embankments to within 31h feet of the final height by August. Concrete parapet wall footings were formed and poured prior to bringing the dam to its highway sub grade height.

Riprap was placed on both embankments and the outlet works access road was excavated and graded. Finishing the spillway was dependent on the progress made on the embankment. Excavation, form building, and pouring of the open chute section of the spillway commenced as soon as it was possible to route hauling traffic over the spillway bridge. After the chute was finished, the final concrete was poured on the spillway intake channel in September. By October, the radial control gates and control apparatus had been completely assembled, painted, and adjusted. At the outlet works, the temporary water diversion conduit was plugged in January and the two tube valves were installed by May.

The final concrete bulkhead walls were placed in July, following the spring runoff, completing the outlet 14 Ibid., p. "General Information Concerning the Provo River Project, Utah," press release of project report issued by Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner John C. Page, May 1, p. 15 Ibid., p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 10) works. Requirements of the new railroad grade were completed with construction of a 1,500-foot-long spur and ballasting in the North Deer Creek borrow pit area. By late October, the Rohl-Connolly Co. had completed all aspects of the dam contract five months in advance of the March deadline. 16 The dam filled to capacity and spilled for the first time in operating as expected over the next ten years.

Authorization for the installation of a 5,000-kilowatt hydropower plant and switchyard was approved by the Secretary of the Interior in though the project was not contracted until December The Jacobsen Construction Co. commenced work by excavating a part of the downstream embankment to grade for a power house structure. Concrete cribbing at the southeast corner of the structure was completed by July The walls and roof were erected by the close of in preparation for installation of turbines the next spring. Work on the switchyard included installation of structural steel towers, a transformer and a fault interrupter switch. Arrival of the turbines and generators was delayed over the next year.

Operational testing of the power plant began in early December and the final work was completed at the close of March The construction of the Deer Creek Powerplant was the last pending feature of the Provo River Project. 17 Other structures erected on the downstream side of the dam's base between and included a valve house, a gate house that was replaced with a small dam keeper's office, a chlorination building, tailrace regulating gates, and two storage structures. These were constructed on the west side of the outlet works tailrace and are collectively referred to as the dam complex.

Of the original structures, only the chlorination building and the tailrace control gates exist today, due to extensive reconstruction of the complex between and The office building, valve house, and storage structures were removed during the reconstruction project. The main purpose of the project was to install a new inlet gate and chemical additive workings for the Salt Lake Aqueduct, including a section of new pipe that joins the gate and chemical additive works with the old aqueduct pipe on the west side of the spillway canal. The two storage sheds were situated where excavation was necessary and were removed. The office building and valve house were replaced by a modern concrete office building where the dam 16 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. V, p.

36, 17 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. XXXXVIII, p. 37; Bell, p. 13. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 11) keepers control the aqueduct gates electronically; monitor the dam, spillway, and powerplant; and also garage their maintenance vehicles. The chlorination building was not removed, but it is no longer used other than for its emergency electrical generator. Chlorination of the water entering the aqueduct was discontinued around in favor of aeration. 18 Today a treatment chemical is added on-site to maintain the cleanliness of the aqueduct's pipeline, the appurtenant holding tank and works of which are now underground adjacent to the inlet gates.

The hydroelectric powerplant installed in the tailrace regulating gates installed in and the original aqueduct inlet gate were not disturbed during the reconstruction. Minimal descriptive information of the older dam complex structures can be offered. Although Bureau of Reclamation records indicate that two storage structures, a gate house, and an office building were constructed in historic construction photographs point out that this is not the case.

19 One of the storage structures, the valve house, and the gate house may have been constructed as early as 20 The second storage structure may have served as an aeration building after the chlorination process was discontinued around 21 The valve house was a 108-square-foot wood frame structure with corrugated sheet metal siding and roof adjacent to the gate house and powerplant tailrace. The 144-square-foot, concrete block dam keeper's office may have replaced the original wood frame, corrugated sheet metal-sided gate house in 22 The two corrugated sheet metal storage structures, situated on the south side of the dam complex, were gable roofed; one was square feet, and the other was square feet. They functioned as garages and chlorine storage areas.

All structures were oriented east to west and rested on poured concrete floors. 23 1s State of Utah Historic Site Form, Utah Office of Preservation, "Deer Creek Reservoir Dam Complex prepared by Michael R. Polk, Sagebrush Archaeological Consultants, 19 Bureau of Reclamation Building Inventory Status List, program identification FCROIBS, Jan. 16, p. 49. Although these documents list the structures' construction dates as it is apparent in photographs of the completed dam from the project history that no structures had been built near the outlet works, tailrace, or access road. The construction dates reported on the inventory documents are most likely erroneous. 2 0 Weymouth, et. al., p. 30.

The construction date of the structures is based on an informant interview, and is unsubstantiated by further documentation. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. 23 Bureau of Reclamation Building Inventory Status List, p. 49. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 12) C.

Provo River Project History

The Provo River Project was the largest reclamation project in Utah. Located in Summit, Wasatch, Utah and Salt Lake counties, it included the principle population centers of the state. Its purpose was to provide supplemental irrigation water to about acres of highly productive private farmlands, primarily in Utah and Salt Lake counties. It also appears to have been Reclamation's first water project intended to provide domestic water to accommodate population expansion and to provide adequate culinary water in the event of a drought. 24 The cities and communities that were water subscribers included Salt Lake City, Provo, Orem, and Spanish Fork.

The project was developed, researched, and damsites tested during a planning phase between and when the project was presented to Congress for approval. The concept and planning of the project was formally initiated by the Utah Water Storage Commission, created by the state legislature in The Commission was charged with development and conservation planning of Utah's water supply in cooperation with other federal, state, and local agencies. Severe drought conditions in Utah between and prompted the availability of emergency relief funds used for an acceleration of project planning and dam site testing.

Associations and water districts were organized among the participating agricultural water users, cities, and communities in order to sell subscriptions and to facilitate repayment/maintenance contracts. Under provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act of President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed authorization for the Provo River Project on November 16, Construction of the project began in and project water was first available in with the completion of the Deer Creek Dam. Some aspects of the project, such as canals and laterals, were delayed by wartime scarcities of material, workers, and funds. Full-scale construction resumed in and unfinished portions of the Salt Lake Aqueduct were completed in The total project cost was million.

25 The project was organized into three divisions: the Deer Creek Division, the Aqueduct Division, and the Utah Lake Division. The Deer Creek Division called for the construction of the Deer Creek Dam on the Provo River and the resulting Deer Creek Reservoir, capable of storing 24 Heather M. Weymouth, et. al., "A Cultural Resources Evaluation of the Deer Creek Reservoir Area, Wasatch County, Utah," prepared by the Sagebrush Archaeological Consultants, for the Bear West Co., Salt Lake City, p. 37. This assessment is based on an informant interview, and is unsubstantiated by further documentation. 25 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. V, p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 13) acre-feet of water with an annual yield of acre-feet, as its key features.

The reservoir was fed by three watersheds: the Provo River, the Weber River, which supplied as much as 60 percent of the water, and the Duchesne River. Water collection from these sources required two construction projects. The 5 112-mile-long, 9%-foot-diameter, 350-second-feet capacity concrete-lined Duchesne Tunnel through the Uinta Mountains diverted surplus water from the headwaters of the Duchesne River to the upper Provo River for storage in the reservoir. Surplus water from the Weber River required the enlargement of the 9-mile-long Weber-Provo Diversion Canal from 210 second-feet to second-feet. This water also reached the reservoir via the Provo River.

Below the reservoir, the Provo Reservoir Canal was enlarged from 220 second-feet to 550 second-feet capacity to deliver Provo River water to project lands in the Utah and Salt Lake valleys. Approximately 23 miles of reconstruction between the mouth of the Provo Canyon and Jordan Narrows was required. Construction of the Deer Creek Dam and reservoir also called for the permanent relocation of miles of the Heber City Branch of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad as well as 9.1 miles of U.S. Highway formerly Utah Route 7. 26 The Aqueduct Division was responsible for construction of the 42-mile- long, 69-inch-diameter Salt Lake Aqueduct. The 150-second-feet-capacity aqueduct originated at the base of the Deer Creek Dam and terminated in Salt Lake City.

This pipeline passed through two tunnels in order to reduce its linear distance. The 15,037-foot-long Alpine-Draper Tunnel passed through a ridge on the Salt Lake/Utah county line and reduced the length of the route by 11 miles. The 3,614-foot-long Olmsted Tunnel ran through a low saddle separating Provo Canyon from Utah County miles from the Alpine- Draper Tunnel. Both 61/2-foot-diameter tunnels were horseshoe shaped and concrete lined. 27 The Utah Lake Division constructed a dike across Goshen Bay of Utah Lake and a channel revision of the Jordan River outlet of the lake. The point of the dike was to reduce the surface area of Utah Lake by acres, thereby reducing the loss of water through evaporation and effectively increasing the yield of water from the lake by acre-feet.

The channel revision lowered the outlet of the lake, improving spilling conditions at high 26 Project History: Provo River Project-Utah, Deer Creek Division, Vol. II, p. 21 Ibid., p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 14) water levels and reducing the need to pump water from the lake into the river during low water levels. 28 D.

DEER CREEK DAM SOCIAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CONTEXT A history of government involvement in irrigation projects throughout the West was well-established through legislation and numerous Bureau of Reclamation projects initiated before By this time, 40 projects had been or were being completed that irrigated 3.6 million acres, which produced crops valued at million in 29 The importance of water and irrigation was tantamount to the previous and future social and economic development of the West. The Provo River Project and the Deer Creek Dam were initiated during a decade that presented unique social and environmental challenges calling for large-scale solutions that had a significant impact on future water projects.

Although the necessity of water storage and conservation planning was well understood in Utah since the late nineteenth century, the largest-scale water project within the state remained in the planning stages until the Abnormal climatic and hydrologic conditions permeated the West just before and during the producing severe drought conditions as well as severe flooding throughout the United States. The Mississippi River flood in coupled by a widespread drought that gripped the southern Great Plains region later know as the Dust Bowl, led to catastrophic environmental and economic losses that resulted in a widespread exodus and migration toward the far western states.

The urgency for immediate relief on all levels, from basic subsistence and shelter to the physical and economic recovery of entire states and regions, was of national concern. These environmental events compounded and precipitated the beginning of the Great Depression, a national economic crisis that left Americans hungry, homeless, and without prospect for work. The role of the federal government in taking the lead in providing relief as well as recovery programs through legislation was accelerated, the ramifications of which went beyond providing immediate solutions to setting precedents for the future role of government in public welfare, economic recovery, and natural disaster relief.

In particular, the floods and droughts of the brought into focus the importance of the federal government's role in large-scale water planning, where soil and water 2s Ibid., p. 19. 2 9 Ellis L. Armstrong, editor, History of Public Works in the United States Chicago: American Public Works Association, p. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 15) resource conservation were viewed as key factors of national interest. For example, devastation caused by flooding resulted in federal flood control on all streams as a general welfare function. This extended soil and water conservation protocols to smaller, upstream watersheds in addition to major water courses.

30 A change in political leadership in brought with it Roosevelt's New Deal programs that championed the responsibility of the federal government to provide opportunities and relief for Americans facing environmental circumstances over which they had no control. In this way, reclamation projects were a means by which the government could provide a broad remedy to an array of national problems. Well-planned, large-scale water projects would in themselves normalize the boom and bust cycles experienced by both agricultural and industrial water users, while simultaneously providing surplus water for urban expansion. Such projects would also open marginal lands to settlement and further economic development to support and stabilize population shifts caused by drought and the Depression.

The construction projects also created the opportunity for professional, skilled, and unskilled workers to be employed in the development of an enlarged national infrastructure during a period when unemployment was rampant. National work programs such as the Civilian Conservation Corps also had the important effects of boosting morale and a sense of national unity. 31 In the face of the national environmental crisis and the New Deal leadership, the role of the federal reclamation program expanded beyond its previous concentration to develop specific, large-scale tracts of problematic arid land. The driving philosophy previously had been to solve immediately apparent irrigation problems in such areas.

The new focus was to increase the scale of water projects so they might provide economic development and sustainable opportunities on smaller-scale marginal lands. The effects of a particular project were thereby felt in small and medium-sized farming communities. The purpose was to help control population expansion into areas already considered to be fully populated through migration by allowing farmers and industry to be viable in new or previously marginal areas. For these reasons, the key features of the new water projects, such as their dams and reservoirs, were more distant and at higher elevations from the lands they served to irrigate than previously. Not only was project scale increased 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. Deer Creek Dam HAER No.

UT-93 (page 16) by distance, but also the projected number of users and acres benefited by a t .32 proJec By the many technological applications in large-scale water projects had been proven and tested, whether through solid, successful applications or by failure and review. Advances in technological sciences of engineering design, geology, and hydrology provided the ability to plan the important physical requirements, capabilities, and effects of dams and conveyance systems and of the environment itself. Some examples included accurately estimating precipitation, runoff, expected storage capacities, and characteristics of construction sites.

Similarly, developments in the chemistry and tested application of materials, such as concrete, steel, and compacted earth, had far-reaching effects in terms of project scales and safety expectations. The large-scale reclamation projects of the relied on the substance of previous material testing to derive specifications for proper application, stress, and longevity. The emergence of high-capacity, self- propelled earth moving equipment, such as excavators, trucks, and bulldozers made a significant technological contribution in terms of project scale, time frames, and labor requirements and made the large-scale reclamation projects possible.

Large quantities of earth and rock could be reshaped or moved, tunnels driven, and all sorts of materials transported quickly by this equipment, a huge change from previous decades. Given these technological factors, reclamation projects repeatedly set precedents in design, scope, and scale of construction, a ramification of which was to demonstrate the psychological unity and technological prowess of the nation to overcome a time of social and economic depression. 33 The was a period of shifting ideas about securing stability for Americans through federal involvement in national water resource planning.

By annual expenditures on water-related programs and projects had reached million, a tenfold increase from The Provo River Project, including Deer Creek Dam, is one of the best examples of this historic period in all aspects. It was proposed by Reclamation in after 10 years of planning and finally approved under the appropriations of the National Industrial Recovery Act, an important piece of New Deal legislation passed during Roosevelt's famous "first 100 days." 34 Utah was overwhelmed with the 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid., p. 34 Toni Rae Linenberger, Damsite, Dynamos, and Development: The Bureau of Reclamation's Power Program and Electrification of the West. Washington, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Government Printing Office, p. 55. Deer Creek Dam HAER No.

UT-93 (page 17) same severe drought conditions as the rest of the West beginning in and watched its water surplus fall to extreme low levels over the next several years. It is clear that the project was accelerated and funded through the larger social context of national events of which the state was a part. Also, the Deer Creek Dam was the second largest earth fill dam constructed by Reclamation at the time, exceeded only by the Vallecito Dam of the Pine River Project in Colorado. This exemplified Reclamation's ability to apply technological advancements to larger and larger projects while saving time and money, and putting both private contractors and CCC forces to work. Deer Creek Dam HAER No. UT-93 (page 18) !<_5_ooo_ TEMPORARY HIGHWAY-,/ . , -,. \' .

' (~ \ f \ ; I \ I l I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I / '.I I I \ \ ' !1' "' . 0 111 a - Deer Creek Darn HAER No. UT-93 (page 19) /If. RELOCATED RAJ LROAD /,. I ,/' "' f ' -HIGHWAY RELOCATION / / ( To be constructed by Stale of Utah J / ,/ ,' I I I I I / I I I I \I I I I ~, I I I I I I I I b / / I irr,i / Deer Creek D HAER No. UT~; (page 20) \ ,// // UPPER CHAR LESTON CANAL 0 ~ATMENT HlOO iooo PRo:iAEAU OF'o; ~:!~NTERfOA - -=-;-~;--;:-,~,oo~o'.___ . D EE R AIVER p AT/ON ROJECT - UTAH SCAL[ OF' F~ET R L0CAT D RA~RE EK DAM LROAD AND HIGHWAY G E:N E: RAL ___ MAP !\ . Creek Dam Deer - UT-93 HAER No. (page 21) / /\j O ,, .,. ;; Deer Creek Dam HAER No.

UT-93 (page 22) DRAWING No.6 \ 0 0 ~i \ ,.concme curb -~;;hwoy n subqrode --- SECTION C C CREST SECTIONS Of" IH'rrl/llOR IJURCAU Ot" Rl:CLAM,111,TJOH PROVO RIV /lf ,-ltOU~CT-UTAff D E' R CR E E K DANI,' GENERAL LAYOUT ANO CRE~T SECTIONS ADDENDUM TO: HAER UT-93 DEER CREEK DAM HAER UT-93 Spanning the Provo River at the intersection of U.S. Highway 189 & Deer Creek Reservoir Charleston vicinity Wasatch County Utah REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED DRAWINGS HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior C Street NW Washington, DC