Canyon View Park Pond Habitat and Access Improvements Phase I
Project ID: 7759
Status: Proposed
Fiscal Year: 2027
Submitted By: N/A
Project Manager: Chris Crockett
PM Agency: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
PM Office: Central Region
Lead: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
WRI Region: Central
Description:
Improve fish habitat and fishing access at heavily utilized community fishery in Spanish Fork, Utah by dredging and the installation of habitat structures and an aeration system.
Location:
Canyon View Park Pond, Spanish Fork, Utah.
Project Need
Need For Project:
Canyon View pond is a heavily utilized 1.8 acre pond in Utah County. The pond receives over 5,000 angler hours per acre per year. The majority of the pond is four feet in depth or less which limits fish survival, natural reproduction, and angler catch rates (i.e. shallow, shy fish). The pond also experiences less than optimal swings in temperature and dissolved oxygen during the summer primarily driven by limited volume and high BOD (lots of sediment for a small volume of water) The pond has gradually silted in over the past several decades. We propose to dredge the pond and remove approximately five feet of sediment from the majority of the pond (roughly 11,300 cubic yards).
Objectives:
1. Dredge approximately 11,300 cubic yards of sediment from the pond (deepen the majority by 4-5 ft while retaining a gradual slope near shore) 2. Purchase and install approximately 20 fish habitat structures (Mossback Trophy Tree, Safe Haven, Fry Fortress or similar) 3. Purchase and install diffused aeration system to increase dissolved oxygen and help prevent fish stress and mortality
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
Why Here/Why Now-Canyon View pond is a heavily utilized 1.8 acre pond in Utah County. The pond receives over 5,000 angler hours per acre per year. Spanish Fork City has recently improved water delivery to the pond to help supplement summer water levels. Recent fisheries surveys by DWR have shown that even with lower water levels the pond is capable of overwintering/oversummering wipers, bluegill, and channel catfish and has potential to support a largemouth bass (LMB) fishery. The Central Region is gradually improving ponds with LMB potential to meet the increased interest in the species as documented in recent creel and angler opinion surveys.
Relation To Management Plan:
Project actions are supported by UDWR Community Fisheries Management Plan and Spanish Fork City Parks Master Plan.
Fire / Fuels:
The project doesn't significantly reduce fuels or fire risk
Water Quality/Quantity:
The project will increase water quantity available to support the fishery (approximately double water volume) and improve water quality by increasing dissolved oxygen and decreasing water temperatures.
Compliance:
Dredging of existing pond to original volume will not trigger NEPA, ESA, or other regulatory permits. No arch clearance needed.
Methods:
1. Dredging-Dredge and fill transport will be contracted out to a private company with some transport support from Spanish Fork City. Preliminary cost estimates suggest a cost of $20-35 a yard with the use of two excavators, one to remove sediment from the "center" of the pond and then swing it to a dump location closer to the pond shoreline where another excavator will load it into a dump truck for transport to the Spanish Oaks Gun Range (about 1.5 miles away). The pond will be drained in the spring of 2026. The use of swamp mats may be needed depending upon how much the sediment is able to dry. 2. Fish habitat structures will be purchased from Mossback or Pond King and installed by UDWR personnel after dredging. 3. Aeration unit will be installed by Spanish Fork City personnel.
Monitoring:
Water quality including DO, pH, temp, and SpCond will be monitored monthly during the summer post project for a minimum of three years. UDWR personnel will conduct fish sampling 2-3 years post project (we surveyed recently in 2024).
Partners:
Spanish Fork City
Future Management:
Future pond maintenance and cost of electricity for aeration will be conducted by Spanish Fork City. Fish production and stocking will be implemented by UDWR. The pond and park grounds are monitored monthly by Spanish Fork City to identify maintenance needs.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The project supports the quality and quantity of the fishing/recreation by enhancing and increasing fisheries habitat (both water and structure) and improving fishability of the pond.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$219,940.00 $84,750.00 $304,690.00 $22,972.00 $327,662.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Materials and Supplies Diffused aeration system and installation (wiring, line trenching, etc) $11,500.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 2027
Contractual Services Dredging of approximately and fill transport of 11,300 yards of sediment at $25 a yard $197,750.00 $84,750.00 $0.00 2027
Materials and Supplies 2-3 ft boulder rock, approximately 36 tons, rocks will be used as needed for protecting submerged slopes and creating additional fisheries habitat. This is a modest amount of rock that will be used as needed. Estimate at around $80/ton $2,880.00 $0.00 $0.00 2027
Personal Services (permanent employee) Project oversight by Spanish Fork City project manager ($68/hr)and engineer ($80/hr) anticipate 2 hours per day for 32 work days (about 1.5 months)/ $0.00 $0.00 $9,472.00 2027
Materials and Supplies 20 fish habitat structures (Trophy Tree Kit, Safe Haven Kit, Fry Fortress products by Mossback or similar provider). $7,810.00 $0.00 $0.00 2027
Equipment Rental/Use Spanish Fork City dump truck and driver to reduce contract fill hauling costs. 60 hr contribution $0.00 $0.00 $12,000.00 2027
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$219,940.00 $84,750.00 $304,690.00 $22,972.00 $327,662.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
Spanish Fork City $0.00 $0.00 $10,972.00 2027
Habitat Council Account $219,940.00 $0.00 $0.00 2027
Spanish Fork City dump truck and driver $0.00 $0.00 $12,000.00 2027
Utah Office of Outdoor Recreation DOR grant will includes a portion of the dredging cost in addition to a pond liner, ADA fishing platform, shoreline stabilization, and landscaping materials. $0.00 $84,750.00 $0.00 2027
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Bluegill R3
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Channel Catfish R4
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Largemouth Bass R3
Threat Impact
Droughts Very High
Rainbow Trout R5
Threat Impact
Increasing stream temperatures High
Wiper R3
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Habitats
Habitat
Open Water
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Open Water
Threat Impact
Increasing Stream Temperatures Unknown
Project Comments
Comment 01/22/2026 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
I struggle with projects like this as far as fit for WRI. Maybe I'm the only one and this isn't just this project but maybe a bigger discussion. It just doesn't seem to fit the "watershed restoration" umbrella. I also want you to speak to the habitat structures and inform me some. I struggle with putting plastic out in our landscapes and especially in our waterways. Fence markers, plant protectors, plastic pipe, whatever. Plastic is what it is, way to much of it in our environment on the macro and micro level. Why use artificial plastic "habitat" structures when plastic isn't actually a part of any natural habitat? Why not go through the extra effort to use natural materials? I think of it too in terms if I proposed using plastic artificial structures for toewood in a stream people would kinda think I'm crazy, but in still water I see folks use them all the time. I'm genuinely curious and haven't really ever had this conversation before. Thanks for letting me ask you these questions....well you didn't let me haha. I give other people crap for plastic, I gotta ask you some questions too.
Comment 01/26/2026 Type: 1 Commenter: Chris Crockett
Clint thanks for the comment. As for "fit" it does support several aspects of the three legs of WRI which are 1. "Watershed health and biological diversity", 2. " water quality and yield for all uses", and 3. "opportunities for sustainable uses". Improving aquatics organism habitat through dredging and habitat clicks a lot of boxes on this list, for example supporting additional species of fish, waterfowl, aquatic inverts etc seems to clearly increase #1 biological diversity. Likewise increasing holding capacity of a reservoir, tempering high water temps, enhancing DO, etc seems to fit clearly with "water quality and yield for all uses", increasing/improving angling clearly falls within "opportunities for sustainable use". Improving these aquatic habitats in arid habitats really does benefit a lot of different species. If I need to provide more information let me know. I can probably throw in a little juniper removal if needed. As for pvc habitat and concerns with microplastic. I think that's a valid point. The reason we utilize the structures is they last considerable longer than natural structures and don't contribute organic mater into these systems. The data isn't super robust but things like juniper brush piles can break down pretty fast in aquatic habitat and/or lose a lot of complexity (small twigs, needles, etc). Some studies suggest they lose a lot of functionality in 5 years. Most of the artificial habitat is made from PVC which is resistant to rot, not broken down by invertebrates, and not impacted by water chemistry. Initial studies suggest they are effective habitat for multiple decades. The main thing that degrades PVS is UV light, which is negligible if submerged underwater (even in shallow systems) and physical abrasion (thus why you would be crazy to use in a stream system). The musings on microplastic are outside my area of expertise but most of the sources of concerns are from microfibers and tire/road wear byproducts. Bottom line, we could use natural materials but we'd need to replenish those at each site every 5 years. PS-I added a fact sheet about the Mossback structures which also answers some questions about how environmentally safe they are. Cheers
Comment 02/18/2026 Type: 1 Commenter: Bryant Haley
Hey Chris, sorry for not asking this before the deadline. Any reason why this wouldn't be viable as a dip or draft site for firefighting efforts? I didn't see any powerlines overhead on the satellite view and it looks like a valuable place to have more water.
Completion
Start Date:
End Date:
FY Implemented:
Final Methods:
Project Narrative:
Future Management:
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
15545 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Lake/Wetland/Pond Improvements Aeration
15545 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Lake/Wetland/Pond Improvements Dredging
15545 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Lake/Wetland/Pond Improvements Habitat structure(s) (submerged)
Project Map
Project Map