Stabilizing agricultural production was critical to residents in Utah’s Sanpete Valley in the early 1900s. Overdevelopment after the end of hostilities with Ute Indians in the late 1860s stretched existing river resources beyond the limits of simple irrigation. And although communities east of the Wasatch Mountains had plenty of water, the communities to the west, Ephraim and Spring City, were not as fortunate.

The Horseshoe Irrigation Co., which began operations in 1934, was was one of the companies undertaking efforts to manage and distribute water resources in the valley area. After a number of mixed results to drill a tunnel through the mountain to move some of that water from east to west, the company sought help from the Bureau of Reclamation. Reclamation and the communities of Spring City and Ephraim determined that a system of small feeder canals and two tunnels would move water through the Wasatch Range to the communities. The canals would feed water from Cottonwood Creek on the eastern side of the WasatchMountains into the Ephraim and Spring City tunnels, which would operate independently. The water would then exit through the tunnels into either Oak Creek for delivery to Spring City or Ephraim Creek for delivery to Ephraim.

The Horseshoe Irrigation Co. agreed to enter into a repayment contract with Reclamation for the Sanpete Project, signing the final contract in May 1935. Reclamation oversaw the construction of the project, which concluded in 1939. The Horseshoe Irrigation Co. managed the project’s Spring City Division until it and Ephraim Irrigation Co., manager of the Ephraim Division, met their financial obligations to the government. The Ephraim Irrigation Co. made its final payment on its part of the project in 1979; Horseshoe Irrigation, in 1980.

That’s why Horseshoe Irrigation Co. President Randy Strate minces no words when he explains how he’s using the grant the company received from the Bureau of Reclamation for its outstanding water-conservation efforts. “Many of our diversion structures are old and in need of repair,” Strate said,” so we’d like to upgrade as many of them as we can with more electronics and more accurate diversion structures.”

Strate said that in 2007 the irrigation company received three Reclamation grants: $12,385 for a water-use education program; $11,500 for completing a five-year water-management plan; and $8,600 to install two flow-measurement meters.  These are only a few examples of how the Horseshoe Irrigation Co. has strived to operate efficiently and work closely with Reclamation. It is also why Reclamation’s Provo Area Office nominated Horseshoe Irrigation Co. to receive the Upper Colorado Regional Director’s Outstanding Water Conservation Field Services Program Accomplishment Award for 2007. Strate received that award in November.

Strate sums up the reason for that cooperation simply. “It’s necessity,” he said. “We have limited storage capacity, and we’re basically at the mercy of Mother Nature. We have spring flows from creeks and depend on secondary water but with low snow pack, conservation is a necessity.”

The Horseshoe Irrigation Co. was the first among Reclamation’s partners to provide a water-conservation plan to Reclamation, something Reclamation encourages water entities to develop and submit to the agency. It also made great strides in water efficiency by installing ramp flumes, a weather station, an electronic measuring and transmitting station to measure the tunnel flow rates. And the company has encouraged more efficient use of agricultural water by developing and implementing a program to replace sprinkler nozzles for farmers.

But Strate is looking to future grants to help Horseshoe Irrigation Co. do even more, starting with raising its profile. Additional grants will help to create more shareholder awareness and to further some of the projects the company has planned, he said. And he hints at a big project in the wings. “We have an approximate 500-acre field system that we still flood irrigate,” Strate said, “and that causes huge water losses, in part because it’s the one that’s furthest away from our diversion points.” Consequently, the proverbial farmer at the end of the ditch doesn’t get any water near the end of the water year because what is left goes to more efficient sprinkler-irrigation systems.

“We want to fix that,” he said.