A History of Cache County

Cache County since World War II

12 CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II I, A goes without saying that World War II changed American society. The type of society that existed before the war and the type that emerged afterwards were decidedly different. That difference is apparent in all regions of the United States, whether urban or rural, and is as apparent in Cache County as in other more urbanized regions of the state of Utah. The United States had entered World War II from the worst eco­nomic depression in the nation's history. The experience of the Great Depression also contributed to the remarkable transition of American society. In response to the economic codapse, the federal government, through President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal agenda, began implementing a wide variety of programs designed to counter the economic hardships. Although historians generady con­cede that the New Deal was largely ineffective in ending the Depression, it nevertheless established a legacy of state, local, and fed­eral partnership which has endured to this day. Although it was the economic stimulus of World War II which ultimately reversed the Great Depression, the government programs of the 1930s and 1940s 301 302 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY were also responsible for catapulting the United States from one his­torical period into another. The post-World War II period also marks the point where Utah and Cache County exited one era and entered another. Following the end of the war, in June 1946 economist J.R. Mahoney wrote that "the economy of Utah quickly became one of the most dynamic war activ­ity centers of the country."1 Mahoney saw a rosy future for the post­war economy in the state, particularly if Utah could capitalize on the industries constructed during the war and convert them from wartime to peacetime production. The non-agriculture employment index in Utah skyrocketed during the war. The number of persons employed in the construction industry increased from approximately 5,000 before the war to nearly 18,500 by 1945.2 More importantly, however, for the post-war economy were the new military instada-tions in Utah such as Hid Field, the Ogden Arsenal, Dugway Proving Grounds, and others. Employment at these plants and bases increased tenfold between 1941 and 1943.3 Cache Vadey was largely left out of the wartime industrial expan­sion experienced along the Wasatch Front. Still predominantly agri­cultural, Cache County nonetheless experienced significant prosperity with the increased demand for food and fibre brought about by the war effort. Gross farm income in Utah rose from a low point of $51 million in 1939 to nearly $140 million in 1946." Agricultural prices continued to escalate following the war, peaking in 1949 and 1950. Although farm income rose dramatically during and after the war, on-farm employment continued to dwindle. On-farm employ­ment peaked in Utah in about 1920 and declined successively throughout the next three decades. By 1960 there were fewer on-farm employees in the state than there had been in I860.5 In keeping with the statewide trend, the number of farms and ranches in Cache County also decreased during the same period. In 1935 there were more than 30,000 farms in Utah, with the average containing approx­imately 200 acres. The farms in Cache County, however, were signif­icantly smader than the state average, most containing only about 80 irrigable acres, with some additional pasture ground. By 1962 the number of farms in Utah had declined to 15,000 while the average CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 303 Wheat harvesting, Petersboro, 1970s. (Special Collections Merrill Library, USU) farm size had increased to 700 acres. An increase in farm size was also noticeable in Cache County, where there has been a general trend towards consolidation. The post-World War II period and the resulting widespread agri­cultural mechanization which it spawned made smad farms imprac­tical. Prior to the war most farm equipment was powered primardy by horses. In 1920 only slightly over 500 farms in Utah used tractors; by 1962 that figure rose to over 4,000. The advent of mechanized agriculture made it possible to farm larger acreages; it also became impractical to invest in expensive equipment and only farm a small number of acres. Economists estimated that most farms by the 1960s had between $50,000 and $100,000 invested in machinery.6 By 1993 that estimate had risen to nearly $397,000 in Cache County alone.7 Mechanization sounded the proverbial death knell for many smad farms in Cache Vadey. Unable to make a living on the limited amount of land which most Cache County farms contained or keep pace with machinery costs, some farmers sold out to their more expansive-minded neighbors. More often, however, the family farm in Cache County became a source of secondary income, with chil­dren running the farm whde one or both parents took employment in one of the many new industries created by the war effort. In coop­eration with the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station in Logan, a 304 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY post-war planning committee noted how construction projects and industrial labor requirements affected the farm economy: all avadable labor for mdes around was drained from agriculture . . . [while] at the same time increased demands were made for agricultural products.... Not only laborers but also many farm operators were drawn from agriculture as the wages in defense industries were higher than in agriculture.... Not only was the farm labor supply drawn into industry but also at the same time many farm boys and men were drawn into the armed services.8 As a result, the planning report noted how "labor in agriculture worked longer hours and more days." And, as happened in other wartime industries, women and chddren, "who normally were not so employed," stepped forward to shoulder the plow on Utah's farms. With higher paying jobs stdl avadable in Utah after the war, off-farm employment continued. Historian John L. Powell, in his study of the beet-sugar industry in Cache County, estimates that after the war some 800 "Cache Valley residents commuted to work at Hill Field and the Ogden Arsenal."9 Amalgamated Sugar Company president H.A. Benning, in a letter to Cache County businessman F.P. Champ, objected to the "many Cache County farmers [who] drive to the defense plants near Ogden where they are employed. These farmers would be better off if they remained at home and planted and took good care of fifty acres of sugar beets."10 The beet-sugar industry was one of several along with vegetable canneries and mdk processing plants which had developed in Cache County to manufacture agricultural products. From 1914 through the mid-1920s, during the peak of the sugar-beet frenzy, five pro­cessing plants operated in Cache Vadey, including a plant at Whitney, Idaho. Only two plants, at Whitney and at Lewiston, survived into the 1950s. Keen competition existed in the Cache Valley sugar-beet industry in the 1910s and 1920s. But the Amalgamated Sugar Company, began by David Eccles in 1902, eventually dominated the field. Amalgamated was the first to venture into the beet industry in Cache Valley, and it was the last to leave. After purchasing the Whitney plant in 1960, the company finally held the monopoly on sugar production in Cache Valley which it has sought since the turn CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II Sugar beet harvesting, 1970. (Special Collections Merrill Library, USU) of the century. However, by 1960 there was little profit to be made from sugar beets in Cache Valley, the monopoly notwithstanding. The Whitney plant only operated for two more seasons before closing in 1962. The Lewiston plant persisted for another decade, finady clos­ing down in January 1972.11 In a press release dated 4 January 1972 the company noted: The Lewiston[,] Utah, sugar factory has been permanently closed with the end of this year's sugar campaign The Lewiston plant has become the smallest in the Amalgamated system . . . it h a s . .. a rated daily slicing capacity of 1,900 tons of sugarbeets. Amalgamated's four larger factories in Idaho and Oregon have an average rating of nearly 7,000 tons per day.12 The company claimed the closure was entirely for economic rea­sons, stating that "the technical obsolescence inherent in a factory so old made the plant unable to continue operations efficiently or prof­itably." Nevertheless, other circumstances related to economics also may have contributed to the factory's closing. In 1958 the United States Health Service convened a special conference at Utah State University to study the podution problem on the Bear River. In tes­timony presented at the conference, E.C. Garthe, regional engineer for the U.S. Public Health Service, rehearsed for the attendees the gravity of the situation. Industrial wastes from various area agricul- 306 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY rural processing plants-from the sugar factory at Whitney, Idaho, to the milk plant at Wellsville, Utah-contributed an amount of podu­tion to the river equal to that produced by a population of over 700,000 people."13 In response to the testimony presented by the Public Health Service, R.N. Cottrell of the Amalgamated Sugar Company threat­ened to close down the plants unless the demands on pollution con­trol were lessened. Cottrell noted: "Mr. Alexander [Aleck Alexander, Public Health Service sanitary engineer] recommended that the efflu­ent from the Lewiston sugar factory be cleaned up to the extent of 90 percent.. .. My position is that such a recommendation is totally unrealistic."14 Cottrell used the Public Health Service report to demonstrate his point by noting that the population equivalency of the Lewiston plant's pollution was roughly six times the population of Ogden, Utah, in 1958. Cottrell continued if we were required to treat that effluent, we would have to estab­lish a treating plant equivalent to one which could handle that size city. I contend that many cities of that size would have difficulty in financing such a project, and particularly in our case ... we [are] a marginal operation and to impose on us such a cost would merely result in our closing that plant.15 In four years the company did close its plant at Whitney, Idaho, and, although attempts were made to limit the amount of pollution at the Lewiston plant over the next decade, environmental restrictions no doubt also played a role in its closure. Other factors also contributed to the demise of agricultural pro­cessing plants in Cache Vadey following World War II. The beet-sugar industry provides a good example of these changes. Industries which were constructed to process locally produced farm commodities quickly disappeared as farmers, armed with greater mechanical means and the option of working a second job at one of the state's defense plants, began concentrating their efforts on less-demanding produce such as alfalfa and barley, turning away from labor-intensive crops such as sugar beets and vegetable row crops. A similar fate to that of the beet-sugar industry befell the can­ning industry, which had existed alongside the sugar-processing CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 307 plants in Cache Valley since 1918 when Joseph and James Anderson of Morgan, Utah, constructed a plant in Smithfield. Other plants were established by the brothers at Richmond and Hyrum, and in Franklin, Idaho. The California Packing Corporation acquired the Morgan Canning Company's Cache Valley holdings in 1928 and con­tinued to process peas, corn, green beans, and later cabbage and car­rots with varying degrees of success untd 1980. The Smithfield plant was converted to a can-processing plant for a number of years before completely closing in 1993. Simdarly, although the Franklin plant continued for some years to process locally grown produce, it also closed following the 1994 season.16 The plants' closures were the cap­stone of a trend which had been progressing since the close of World War II. Vegetable production plummeted throughout the state, drop­ping from nearly 25,000 harvested acres in 1950 to fewer than 5,000 in 1980.17 Due in part to the closing of the processing plants, agriculture in Cache County over the last four decades has moved decisively away from diversification and towards specialization. Since the late 1960s most agricultural enterprises in the county have been geared towards the production of livestock-either dairy cattle or beef cattle. Dairying has long been a mainstay of agriculture in the county. Creameries had been in operation since pioneer times, but fodowing 1900 there began a proliferation of condensed-mdk factories. One of the largest was that of Sego Condensed Mdk Company at Richmond, discussed in an earlier chapter.18 In the 1920s local milk producers organized the Cache Vadey Dairy Association, a cooperative which the farmers hoped would provide them with more clout in negotiat­ing with the Sego Mdk Company. The cooperative persisted through­out the Depression years with its attempt to increase the amount paid for butterfat, whde the Sego Mdk Company fikewise continued to try to thwart those attempts. Having only some small successes, in 1937 the association decided it would be advantageous to begin operation of their own plant. In 1942 the cooperative purchased and retooled the old Amalgamated Sugar Plant west of Smithfield at Amalga. The plant had sat nearly idle since its closure in 1919, being used only as a storage warehouse for local tomato and onion crops. The rise in milk prices during World War II made possible the new enterprise's sur- 308 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY vival; but for the next two decades the Cache Vadey Dairy Association was beset with financial troubles.19 The association hired Edwin C. Gossner to supervise the cheese-making operations at the Amalga plant. A native of Switzerland who relocated to Cache Valley during World War II, Gossner brought with him a knowledge of cheese making and soon developed a superior Swiss cheese product in Cache County. Gossner's cheese became the hallmark of the association in the years to come as wed as serving as one of the county's claims to fame. Difficulties nevertheless developed between Gossner and the cooperative board, and in the early 1960s Gossner was released from his position as manager of the Amalga plant. Gossner's dismissal touched off a series of lawsuits and counter-lawsuits, which in the end plummeted the Cache Valley Dairy Association back into finan­cial troubles. In 1966 the association attempted to block Gossner's application for a small business loan which he sought in order to establish a competing processing plant in Cache County. In a letter to Utah Cooperative Association president W.B. Robins, Cache Vadey Dairy Association board member A.W. Chambers explained the rea­soning behind the attempted block. Chambers called attention to the fact that the Amalga plant and the Sego Milk Company plant at Richmond were both operating at only about 75 percent capacity. He also noted that the association had the necessary trucks to deliver the finished product to market. Drawing on the analogy of the previous demise of the sugar industry in Cache County, Chambers stated: We have the history of having operated five sugar mills in Cache Valley years ago and now we are running one at less than capacity. We don't want a duplication of that situation in the milk business. Therefore, it would seem foolhardy to grant a small business loan . . . to permit one who is prejudiced against the established com­panies to establish a competitive plant which can only reduce the total income to the dairymen.20 The Smad Business Administration nevertheless approved Gossner's application for a $350,000 loan. Gossner began constructing the new plant that year, and by 1969 the plant in Logan was in full operation. With the success of the dairy industry in Cache County, agricul- CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 309 ture continued to play a major role in the county. In 1975 many of the county's major employers had ties to agriculture in one way or another. The Hesston Corporation, a manufacturer of farm machin­ery, located a plant in rural Nibley. Ironically, however, one of the pieces of machinery produced at the Hesston plant was a mechani­cal sugar-beet harvester; yet by 1975 sugar beets had all but disap­peared from the fields of Cache County. This irony is at the heart of the economic changes which occurred fodowing World War II. Most agricultural processing indus­tries of the earlier period were begun initially to process locally grown produce. The inability of local farms to supply sufficient pro­duce contributed to the later closure of the plants. Although the Hesston plant did not necessarily depend on local farmers to pur­chase its equipment, the company nevertheless closed the Cache County plant in 1977. The Weathershield Company, a manufacturer of windows and doors, occupied the vacated plant soon afterwards and continues operation to the present day. Other agriculture-related industries, such as the meat-packing plants of E.A. Miller and Sons, and Tri-Mdler in Hyrum, also did not depend on the local supply of beef and hogs to fuel their "dis-assem-bly" lines, nor did they count on local consumers to buy their prod­ucts. By 1993 E.A. Mdler and Sons had doubled the output on its kill-floor to 750 cattle a day, far more animals than Cache Valley could provide. Most of the cattle processed at the Hyrum plant were imported. Additionady, Tri-Mdler regularly imported beef carcasses from as far away as Nebraska and marketed its product nationady.21 As agricultural industries continued to grow and expand the boundaries of their markets, new alliances were made from outside the locality and state. Graduady, most local businesses were absorbed or consolidated with larger companies in the 1970s and 1980s. The Cache Valley Dairy Association allied itself with groups from neigh­boring associations in Wyoming and Colorado to become Western Dairymen Cooperative, whde E.A. Mdler and Sons was absorbed by national agribusiness giant ConAgra. The other Hyrum-based meat packing plant, Tri-Mdler, was purchased by Thorn Apple Valley, Inc., a Michigan-based company. The larger the conglomerate, the greater the expectation for pro- 310 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY duction. Economic reasons have been the reason most often given by company officials for the closure of most area processing plants, from sugar beet and canning factories to the closure of Tri-Mdler in 1995. Thorn Apple Valley spokesman Rich Allen stated in March 1995 that Tri-Miller's "hog slaughter... and bacon operations were costly and losing money."22 Aden also noted that northern Utah was simply too far away from the company's major suppliers in Idaho, Colorado, and Nebraska. The economic changes experienced in Cache County since World War II have been as dramatic as during any other period in Utah his­tory. Only two agricultural processing industries exist in the county today-meat packing and dairy. This again points to the encroach­ing specialization-both manufacturing and production-within the agricultural sector in Cache County. The valley predominantly pro­duces only three crops: grain, field corn, and alfalfa. All are used to support livestock, which in turn help sustain the county's two major industries. But E.A. Mdler and Sons, even prior to their buy-out by ConAgra, has never relied on locally produced beef. The company's fleets of trucks are seen throughout the nation and Canada deliver­ing dressed beef and returning with live cattle. Similar fleets of trucks are seen with the familiar mouse-and-cheese symbol of Cache Valley cheese. The dairy industry has suffered for years with inadequate supplies of locally produced milk, and, although Cache Valley cheese has become known in many parts of the nation, not all cheese and mdk products produced in the county come from Cache County mdk. Nor could the county's farmers begin to produce enough hogs to supply the needs of the Thorn Apple Valley Company's Tri-Mdler operation. Other areas offered better incentives for the agribusiness corporation and, with few allegiances to local producers, that corporation left Hyrum for "greener pas­tures." Hyrum is currently looking for a new tenant to occupy the Tri- Mdler complex. Franklin is also looking for potential businesses to utdize the former Del Monte canning factory located there.23 Smithfield, on the other hand, recently has found a tenant for its formerly vacant Del Monte plant, and therein lies a cameo of the his­toric trend of Cache Valley industry. Agricultural production is no longer tied directly to local processing plants; rather, it is tied to CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 311 national markets. Manufacturing in Cache County has long since moved away from production for local consumption, and most firms locating in the county are geared towards the production of mer­chandise that is hoped to be marketed nationady or globally. "Those Good Peas," the motto of the Morgan Canning Company which is still displayed at the Smithfield plant, is a reminder of Cache County's predominantly agricultural past. But in February 1996 the plant was leased to Icon Health and Fitness, Inc., a Logan-based man­ufacturer of exercise equipment. The plant's new tenants had no intention of taking down the old motto, and with the emphasis of health and fitness that is so much a part of the national conscious­ness of the 1990s, it provides an interesting juxtaposition between the past and present.24 Icon entered a field of manufacturing which was earlier entered successftdly by Weslo International in 1982. Weslo was the brainchdd of three Utah State University graduates: Blaine W. Hancey, Gary E. Stevenson, and Scott R. Watterson. The company's line of products proved extremely marketable, and by 1989 the local company had enticed Weider, Inc., to purchase the Logan business. However, Walterson and Stevenson regained control of both Welso and Weider and, after adding Health Rider, have created one of the largest health-equipment companies in the world. They are a major Cache County employer and support the community in numerous ways. Since 1960, after the decline of agricultural processing plants, the county has seen a proliferation of non-agricultural industries. Although knitting mills and clothing and textde plants had been a part of Cache County's economy since the 1890s,25 only three firms were still in operation by 1960: the Mode O' Day dress factory in Logan, Logan-Cache Knitting Mdls, and Logan Knitting Mdls. Plant obsolescence and changes from cotton and wool fabric to synthetic blends in the 1960s and 1970s generady made the knitting industry uneconomical locally. Logan-Cache Knitting Mills closed in 1965, after the death of the company's founder, E.J. Wdson. Logan Knitting Mdls continued untd 1980.26 The Mode O' Day factory, which began operation in 1949 in the old Dansante Ballroom, continued employ­ing about one hundred seamstresses in its dressmaking works until the late 1980s.27 312 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY Heavier industry also began appearing in the county. In 1961 Thiokol Corporation, a manufacturer of solid rocket propellant, whose plant in neighboring Box Elder County also provided signifi­cant employment for people in Cache County, started manufactur­ing the Trackmaster in the county. Initially, the Trackmaster was seen as an implement which would aid the military in areas where deep snow hampered transportation. The vehicle was also seen as being useful on western mountains for taking snowpack measurements. Graduady, the Trackmaster came to play an important role as a slope-grooming machine and is used widely today on snowmobile trads and by ski resorts. The Trackmaster seemed a perfect example of state, local, and national collaboration. The idea had emerged at Utah State University, had the backing of a huge national corporation based in Trenton, New Jersey, and would employ over 200 local workers. In 1979 inventor and businessman John Z. De Lorean purchased the company from Thiokol for a reported $17.7 million. De Lorean's acquisition touched off a series of problems which eventuady resulted in his declaring bankruptcy and immersed his Logan Manufacturing Company in a succession of court battles. In 1984 the Salt Lake Tribune reported on the beleaguered company's problems; but, after court issues were settled, Logan Manufacturing Company remained in business and continues to produce the Trackmaster today.28 Cache County since the late 1960s has also attracted a number of high-technology firms to the Logan area, including Moore Business Forms in 1967 and Bournes Electronics in 1979. In 1983 Bournes moved part of its operations to its current 1000 West Street location to join Moore Business Forms and Gossner Foods, Inc., at Logan's fledgling industrial park. An economic development program report prepared by the county in 1975 stressed the need to designate "an industrial area in the vicinity of 1000 North and 600 West." The report stated that the "area is conveniently located . . . [and] is an area traditionady associ­ated with industrial activity."29 In 1971 the Wurlitzer Corporation, a manufacturer of organs and pianos, began construction of 200,000- square-foot factory at the 600 West site. The company eventually employed 400 skilled workers before closing and moving out of the CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 313 county in July 1981. The plant was later remodeled and used to house the Bridgerland Area Vocational Center, which institution stdl occu­pies the building today.30 Other firms have since located in the vicin­ity of 600 West and 1000 North, including Lundahl, Inc., Herff Jones, and Schreiber Foods. In 1990 Logan City began the process of expanding the bound­aries of its industrial park by providing incentives to several busi­nesses to relocate along 1000 West Street at approximately 1500 South. Weslo International and HyClone Laboratories were two of the companies that constructed the new facilities at the location. Both Weslo, as mentioned earlier, and HyClone were "spin-off" companies resulting from research which began initially at Utah State University. Currently under the chairmanship of Rex Spendlove, HyClone man­ufactures biological and serum products for research and pharma­ceutical applications.31 As discussed earlier, one of the first spin-offs from Utah State University research was the development in 1961 and later the man­ufacturing of the Trackmaster. In 1966 several engineers working at the university's Electrodynamics Laboratory (Space Sciences Laboratory) left the university to begin a private venture. Cading the company LEPCO, the engineers' main emphasis was in building upper-atmosphere radiometers. After a few years of successful oper­ation, the original founders decided to sed the company to a Boston, Massachusetts, engineering firm, only to buy it back a short while later and rename the firm Wescor. Wescor continues in business today, producing, among other things, psychrometers, which are devices used to measure the water potential of any given area.32 By 1988 over twenty university spin-off companies were in oper­ation in Cache County. Realizing the tremendous potential in fac­ulty- generated research, Utah State created its own research park in 1986. The park is home to several university research units and to a number of private companies which lease space from the institution. Research park director Wayne Watkins noted how the park served both the community and the university by making the two "more strategic and entrepreneurial in regards to [their] relation with indus­try." 33 Simdar to the agricultural industries in Cache County, the sue- 314 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY cesses of the new local high-tech industries also attracted the atten­tion of larger corporations. The Herald Journal noted in 1990 how Cache County had become more dependent on outside capital than other areas of the state.34 Outside of the success stories of locally started small businesses, Doug Thompson, executive director of the Cache Chamber of Commerce, also called attention to the avadabdity of new technologies which made outside ownership possible. Such things as computers, fax machines, and long-distance conference calls made it possible during the 1980s to conduct business from outside the locality. But, Thompson stressed, those "businesses controded by outside companies tend sometimes not to be as involved in the com­munity as those whose leaders live here."35 Such was the case when two Utah State University graduates, Randall K. Thuned and Gary Burningham, formed CULTEC, Inc., in the early 1980s. Beginning in Oregon, where Thuned was pursuing a doctoral degree at Oregon State University, the company started manufacturing a virus-resistant strain of bacteria used in the mak­ing of cheese. The two scientists eventually returned to Logan and merged their company with BIOLAC, a locady run enterprise which was involved in simdar research. The merger of the two companies under the BIOLAC name increased sales from several hundred thou­sand dollars annuady to more than three mdlion dodars annually. By 1985 most of the cheese manufacturers in the United States were using BIOLAC's technology. BIOLAC's success, according to Thuned, was "coming directly off the profit/loss sheet of . . . Miles Laboratories," and in 1985 BIOLAC accepted a buy-out offer from Miles. "The transition from BIOLAC to Mdes was nothing short of rude awakening," Thunell stated. The small company had run its business by establishing personal ties with the cheese manufacturers it served. "When something needed to be done, we just got together, talked about it and did it." There was no need for executive sessions and memoranda, according to Thunell; if there was a problem, they simply went to the client and fixed it.36 All that changed with the Mdes Laboratory take-over. The scien­tists were forbidden to make direct contact with former clients, and it appeared to Burningham and Thunell that Mdes was more interested in suppressing the company's technology than exploiting it. The BIO- CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 315 LAC scientists complained to the huge corporation, and in 1987 the company flew several executives out to Logan to tour the BIOLAC facdities. Some personnel were offered jobs at one of the company's plants in Elkhart, Indiana, and, although several accepted the com­pany's offer and relocated, Thunell and Burningham refused. According to Thunell, one company executive threatened to "make their lives so miserable you'd beg us to let you move to Elkhart." True to its word, Mdes Laboratories closed the BIOLAC plant in December 1988. After revolutionizing the cheese-manufacturing industry, the local scientists were essentially out of a job. But a company shake-up in the Marschad Division of Miles Laboratories brought a new player onto the scene, and the two men were able to take severance from the company. After waiting out their contract, the two reassembled the old CULTEC company, purchased the BIOLAC facdities, and began anew, trying to reestablish old contacts and again revolutionize the industry. Not ad mergers were success stories, but neither have ad failed to achieve the hoped-for results exemplified by the BIOLAC story. Regardless of success or failure, mergers are often necessary to expand local businesses into international markets. Increased indus­trial development in the county also brought increased population and growth. The county's population in 1950 stood at 33,536. Over the next ten years the population rose by only slightly more than 2,000 individuals-to 35,788. During that ten-year period eleven of the county's nineteen incorporated towns and cities lost population. That trend, however, was reversed between 1960 and 1970, when only the towns of Clarkston, Lewiston, and Trenton continued to lose population. With new industrial development taking place during the 1970s, the county's population rose from 35,788 in 1960 to 57,176 in 1980. Furthermore, by 1990 all of the incorporated areas of the county were experiencing population growth, as the county's popu­lation soared to over 70,000.37 With increases in population, non-agricultural employment also rose dramatically in Cache County. A total of 1,218 persons were employed in manufacturing in 1962.38 By 1989 that figure had esca­lated to 8,021.39 In total non-agricultural employment-including 316 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY manufacturing, mining, construction, transportation, trade, finance, government, and services-the county had 8,463 persons engaged in non-agricultural employment in 1962.40 By 1989 more than 27,000 persons were engaged in non-agricultural employment.41 Growth and planning have been one of the single most impor­tant issues facing the county in the last three decades. In 1950 long­time Herald Journal columnist Ray Nelson published the results of a survey conducted by a committee of the Logan chapter of the American Association of College Women. The survey endeavored to determine the future expectations of Logan citizens by asking: "What suggestions do you have for improving Logan?" Some suggested that citizens should exercise more restraint in the removal of trees along their streets, others wanted pigs removed from the city limits, many felt the county should take steps to publicize "the advantages we have to offer," whde others wanted all signs and bidboards removed from city streets. Time and again, Nelson noted, respondents suggested that the city construct an appropriate sewage-disposal system, budd a new hospital, and implement planning and zoning ordinances. One respondent even went so far as to offer to help work "out a master plan for the development of Logan City and vicinity."42 Logan City passed its first comprehensive zoning ordinance in August 1950. Among other things, the ordinance regulated by dis­tricts the size and height of buddings, percentage of a lot that could be occupied, distribution of population, and distribution and use of buddings for residences or industry. The keeping of animals within city boundaries was allowed if it conformed to the idea of a famdy food supply. A maximum of two milk cows, two sheep, two goats, twenty rabbits, and fifty chickens could be kept.43 The subject of keeping pigs was noticeably lacking from the ordinance, although in response to complaints about the animals, Logan's chief sanitarian Reed S. Roberts noted in March 1950 that "the health department [had] no authority at present time to say what parts of town livestock [could] be kept."44 Logan's new ordinance attempted to deal with the matter by stating that the zoning ordinance was "necessary to health, peace and safety of the inhabitants of Logan City."45 In 1956, of the incorporated communities, only Logan City and River Heights had zoning ordinances. Smithfield mayor M.T. Van CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 317 Sheep being driven on Hayden's Fork Road, Cache National Forest, 1954. (Special CoUections Merrill Library, USU) Orden noted that Smithfield, the county's second-largest municipal­ity, should have zoning ordinances but that there were "too many farmers" to ever get such an ordinance passed. Most of the towns had justices of the peace, marshals, and a jail. Most offenders were brought before the justice of the peace for having committed traffic violations. Clarkston mayor Victor Rasmussen, however, also noted an increase in juvenile delinquency. Many of the towns in Cache County in the 1950s had small public libraries, like the Carnegie Library in Smithfield. Without exception, ad had basebad diamonds and some had rodeo grounds. Most had a town hall or city office building; and most had either a regular or volunteer fire depart­ment. 46 None of the incorporated towns and cities in the county had any sewage disposal systems other than cesspools and septic tanks. Logan City's health department claimed that over 150 outhouses still existed in the city in 1950 and that sewage was flowing freely into the west fields.47 Sewage from Logan City dumped into the west fields at two 318 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY Wesley G. Malmberg served as Cache County Sheriff, 1937-1970. (Cache County Courthouse) points. The north outfall spilled into an open ditch approximately 700 feet west of 600 West and 200 North streets. The south outfall, which served the Island area of Logan, discharged north of 200 CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 319 South, several hundred feet west of 600 West Street.48 In October 1957 the voters of Logan City turned down a $1 million bond issue to budd a sewage-treatment plant west of the city.49 Over the course of the next eight years Logan City voters would turn down similar bond issues three times. At the forefront of the controversy over the bond issue was the escalating price-tag for the project. By 1965, the year in which voters finafly passed the bond issue, the project's cost had risen to over $2.5 mdlion. Yet the system which Logan City ultimately constructed was considerably less expensive than the system which was first proposed in 1957. A system such as that proposed in 1957 would have cost over $5 million in 1965. By 1965 the Utah Water Pollution Control Board had relaxed its prohibition on lagoon-type sewage-treatment systems. Up to that time, the board had insisted on mechanical filtration sys­tems, which were considerably more expensive. Lagoon-type systems, the type which Logan City ultimately con­structed, were considered nearly as risky as open sewers during the 1950s, and many citizens voiced concern over health hazards from infected waterfowl and mosquitoes. Many also questioned the odor problem which can result from improperly managed systems. Dr. E.L. Hanson, a retired city physician, is credited with spearheading the drive to inform the public and to convince the Utah Water Podution Control Board to restudy the viabdity of lagoon treatment. Knowing that cost was the major deterrent to having a local sewer system, Hanson and a committee of community activists wrote editorials and visited with community groups to assuage the fears of the county's residents. Hanson's work along with that of community groups who set about to document the effects of podution on the Bear River and its tributaries finatiy convinced the citizenry to pass the sewer bond issue on 31 August 1965.50 Since the 1960s several other communities within the county, including Providence, Smithfield, North Logan, and River Heights, have connected to the Logan City sewer system, which was enlarged and improved in 1989. Other communities have instaded sewer sys­tems within their own communities; still others, mostly the unincor­porated areas of the county, continue to rely on septic tanks. At the time of Ray Nelson's newspaper column in 1950, the other 320 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY most mentioned improvement for Logan City and the county was improved health services. Logan had been a center for the medical needs of citizens not only throughout Cache County but also for neighboring counties in Utah and southeastern Idaho since Oliver C. Ormsby relocated to Cache County from Box Elder County in 1872. Ormsby set up his practice in the old Blanchard Hotel on the corner of 100 West and Center streets. The Blanchard Hotel offered the con­venience of being the county's first hospital, according to historian A. J. Simmonds: "If a patient needed a room for convalescence, he merely continued paying the rent on the room at the hotel where the surgery or other treatment had been performed."51 Chances are the rent at either Blanchard's Hotel or the Cache Vadey House Hotel was considerably less expensive than comparable rooms at hospitals. In 1872, however, there were no other hospitals in Cache County. In 1903 doctors D.C. Budge and W.R. Calderwood opened the vadey's first hospital at 207 West Center Street in Logan. The two doctors were assisted by Nora Christensen, one of the county's first professionady trained nurses. Nurse Christensen was a recent graduate of St. Luke's Hospital in Denver, Colorado, and after arriving in Logan she was placed in charge of training other local women to become nurses. The training was later moved from the Budge/Calderwood Hospital to Brigham Young College. After 1903 Logan City saw a proliferation of hospitals, as Dr. W.B. Parkinson opened the first Latter-day Saints Hospital at 337 West 100 North, followed by the first Budge Clinic, began by doctors D.C. Budge and T.B. Budge, opening in 1905 at the corner of Main and Center streets. With a growing population during the first decade of the twenti­eth century, Cache County and the surrounding area soon needed more than the facilities at the Budge Clinic. A group of local physi­cians and businessmen responded to the need for a new hospital by constructing the first phase of the Utah-Idaho Hospital in 1914. The hospital had a sixty-bed capacity and was located at 300 East 200 North, northeast of the Logan LDS temple. Even the new facility was hard pressed to deal with the medical needs of the World War I period and the flu epidemic which fol­lowed. In response to the growing need, Dr. Clarence C. Randad and CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 321 Airport service station, 4lh North and Main, John Anderson, manager, 1930s. (Courtesy Geniel Pond) Dr. Winston B. Jones opened a hospital at north Main Street, south of the county courthouse, in 1920. That same year doctors H.K. Merrill, R.O. Porter, and E.P. Oldham opened a competing facility, naming it Cache Valley General Hospital, practically next door at 172 North Main Street. In 1928 the doctors involved in Cache Vadey General Hospital constructed a new hospital just east of the Logan LDS tabernacle. The hospital opened in 1929. The new Cache Vadey General Hospital and the Utah-Idaho Hospital, which was renamed Budge Memorial Hospital in 1926, were the area's major medical facilities untd 1948 when the LDS church purchased them both. The church closed Cache Valley General Hospital and remodeled Budge Memorial, which became the Logan LDS Regional Hospital. In 1975 the LDS church withdrew from the field of health care in Cache County and sold the facdity to Intermountain Health Care. In 1977, some twenty-seven years after Ray Nelson publicized the suggested improvements of Logan City's residents, construction began on a new health-care facdity at the present 1400 North Street location; it was dedicated on 21 November 1980.52 322 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY The 1400 North block in Logan City was still predominantly farmland in 1977. Both the city and the county began the process of adopting new plans for development and growth in 1968. A report prepared under the direction of the Cache County Planning Commission noted how the committee had been "for some time deeply concerned with the future environment of the area. . . . Realizing that the high quality environment enjoyed by county resi­dents could only be maintained through sound planning for future growth and development, county officials initiated a program . . . to prepare a Master Plan for Cache County.53 By 1970 the county's master plan had been prepared. Among other things, it suggested that the corridor from North Logan to Providence be designated as the county's urban area, which should "receive the majority of the population growth."54 The unincorpo­rated areas of the county, the plan stressed, should be reserved for agriculture; urban development should not only be restricted in that area but should be prohibited. The plan noted that over the course of the next twenty years, 2,000 acres of prime farmland would be required to accommodate expected new population growth. The plan also echoed what county residents had been saying for over twenty years: restrict or prohibit the "strip" development which progressively had been taking place north along U.S. Highway 91. With fairly strong language the master plan stated that the "area adjacent to the highway shall not be commercially developed from Logan to Smithfield."55 Although controlling commercial development along U.S. Highway 91 between Logan and Smithfield has proven to be nearly impossible, the county has largely confined the population growth, if not between North Logan and Providence, certainly between Smithfield and Providence. County government has been less suc­cessful in limiting housing construction within the greenbelt area of the county. One of the constants in planning for growth and development has been the need for increased development of water resources. As discussed earlier, in the nineteenth century and early years of the twentieth century settlers of Cache Vadey's towns and communities developed and improved irrigation canals. Communities also devel- CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 323 oped culinary and municipal systems. Logan City constructed the first culinary water system in Cache County during the late 1880s, taking water directly out of the Logan and Richmond Canal and con­veying it to homes in a ten-inch wooden pipe. The system was not without problems, particularly during the winter when the canals were dry or frozen. In 1893 the city moved the source of its culinary supply to the newly constructed Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield high-line canal. In 1914, following a report by Logan City engineer T.H. Humphreys, the city again moved its source of drinking water from the canal directly to DeWitt Springs, the present source of most of its water.56 For most communities, however, the community ditch or a shal­low wed usually lined with wood, stone, or brick remained the source of the public's drinking water untd much later in the twentieth cen­tury. Technological advances in water-delivery systems and well drdling made it practical for most communities in Cache County to either improve the efficiency of their springs or drive a deep wed in places where pure water could be found under artesian pressure. With cisterns and reservoirs installed, water could be piped to the individual homes either through the force of artesian pressure or by the force of gravity flow. By the late 1930s most homes in Cache County had running water. The Great Depression of the 1930s proved to be a boon for water development in the county. Federal programs made avadable funds for the construction of community waterworks. Most communities throughout the state of Utah which were without culinary water in the 1930s applied for and received federal funding to acquire such. One of the most positive aspects of the Depression was the develop­ment of a much safer culinary water supply in the county.57 Water has truly been the driving force behind development, not only in Cache County and Utah but throughout the West. The need for increased water resources development-for agriculture initiady, but now more so for industrial and urban needs-has spawned the construction of huge reservoirs, canals, and waterworks which move water from one river basin to another. Agricultural developments have prospered or died because of plentiful or inadequate water sup­plies. Similarly, future urban and industrial developments will also 324 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY be reliant on a constant water supply. The present common view that infinite growth is both necessary and desirable may be one of our greatest misperceptions, as we wdl realize when the supply of water finally cannot provide for any new growth. It appears from an examination of the historical record that Cache Valley's groundwater supply has been depleted as the local population increased. For the first several decades of settlement, groundwater actually increased in Cache Valley. The replumbing of virtually all of the valley's steams into canals created an extraordinary amount of seepage. As these canals were most prone to seepage in the rocky bench areas where they were first diverted from the rivers and streams, the water percolated through the gravel and reappeared on the valley floor. Many fertile and productive tracts of land were waterlogged by the turn of the century. Drainage engineer R.A. Hart, working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 1916, reported on a tract of land located about one mile southwest of Smithfield. The land had originally been part of Bishop Samuel Roskefly's rather extensive holdings and, according to Hart, had been "at one time very productive of grain, hay, beets, and potatoes." In 1911, when Hart first investigated the area, he found it waterlogged, with much of it being an "almost impassable bog." Hart noted in his report that the "injury was due to seepage from irriga­tion of higher lands." After installing lengths of tile drain below the land's surface, the excess water began to dissipate, and was drained to the southwest, emptying into Hopkins Slough at the property's southwest corner. After concluding the work, Hart mentioned how "the water developed is worth many times the cost of drainage." A considerable quantity of water was developed by draining the Roskelly tract. Hart noted: "The quantity of water obtained was so copious that the main was overcharged at the outlet and the 5" tde was fully charged at the upper manhole."58 The water developed by drainage projects throughout Cache Valley greatly benefited farmers farther west towards the valley's cen­ter. Toward mid-summer, after water had been flowing in the canals since June, the drains would start flowing. This flow helped augment the water supplies of secondary irrigators whose land had been set­tled at a later date. CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 325 More recently, more efficient irrigation systems such as pressur­ized pipelines have taken the water out of the canals, whde sprinkler systems have nearly replaced flood irrigation. The new systems have brought about a vastly more efficient use of water by upstream irri­gators; but this second replumbing of the valley's groundwater sys­tem has also nearly dried up the tde drains of eighty to ninety years ago. The first replumbing of the valley's watercourses created an underground flow which was used in successive stages. It created a hydraulic use system based on inefficient use of resources by higher irrigators for their water supply. It was a symbiotic relationship which endured until only recently.59 In addition to changes in the flow of groundwater brought about by more efficient irrigation systems, increased withdrawals of groundwater from the aquifer have also occurred. The earliest mea­surements taken of the county's groundwater were done by Samuel Fortier, working for the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station in the summer of 1896.60 In addition to measuring the valley's streams and rivers, Fortier also measured selected springs on the valley's floor. Over the course of the next one hundred years successive measure­ments were undertaken by hydrologists. In 1944 William Peterson, director of the Utah Cooperative Extension Service, conducted a sim­dar inventory of the county's groundwater resources.61 Between 1896 and 1944 the springs at the valley's center showed little change in flow. In fact, many of the springs, probably owing to an increase in seepage from the upper irrigation canals, showed an increase in flow, particularly by late summer and early fad. During the 1960s the U.S. Geological Survey began taking mea­surements of the county's groundwater.62 Even as late as 1970, how­ever, area springs showed little decrease in volume. In 1944 Peterson measured Hopkins Spring southwest of Smithfield as flowing 3.7 cubic feet per second (cfs). In 1968 the USGS recorded an almost exact measurement for the spring. But by May 1990 the USGS recorded Hopkins Spring as flowing at only 1.15 cfs, less than a third of what it had previously measured.63 Similar decreases have been noted in other areas of the valley where significant usage of ground­water has taken place. Peterson measured Little Ballard Spring located west of Providence at 4.0 cfs in 1944; the USGS recorded the 326 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY Spillway of the Hyrum Dam, 1970s. (Special Collections Merrdl Library, USU) same spring as flowing somewhat less, 3.4 cfs, in 1967. In 1990 the USGS recorded a measurement for Little Ballard Spring at just under 1.0 cfs. Although the latter part of the 1980s and the early 1990s were characterized by area drought, the dramatic decline in the flow of springs on the valley floor is nevertheless indicative of a decreased recharge of the vadey's aquifers. Cache Vadey has long been blessed with substantial water sup­plies, and even though county water users may currently be "mining" more water from the aquifer than is being recharged by annual mountain snows and precipitation, some maintain that there is no serious problem because there is always the Bear River. However, the Bear River, because of its location in nearly the center of the vadey, meandered through Cache County for over forty years after white settlement before settlers put any of its waters to their use. As dis­cussed previously, the first appropriation of Bear River water came to Cache County via the West Cache Canal, which headed north across the Idaho border near Riverdale. Only after the arrival of electric CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 327 power to the communities along the river during the late 1910s and on into the 1920s could Bear River water be diverted within the county by use of irrigation pumps. Communities above Cache County, in Rich County, Utah, Oneida County, Idaho, and Uinta County, Wyoming, began divert­ing the Bear River for irrigation as early as the late 1860s. In 1889 John R. Bothwed began plans to construct two canals at the head of Bear River Canyon between Cache and Box Elder counties and filed on all the unappropriated waters of the Bear River and Bear Lake.64 Bothwell fell into financial trouble during the early 1890s, and the company formed through his promotion eventually became the property of Wdliam Garland, the canal's contractor. Garland, how­ever, also faded and sold the company to Salt Lake City businessmen. In 1900 the Bear River and Bear Lake Water Works was purchased by the Utah-Idaho Sugar Company for $450,000. The sugar company retained ownership of the canals and water rights, erecting a new dam in Bear River Canyon, engineered by J.C. Wheelon. The sugar company also built and operated a hydroelectric plant in Bear River Canyon. In 1927 the entire operation was sold to Utah Power and Light Company, which erected the present Butler Dam downstream from the original canals.65 By 1927 Utah Power and Light was oper­ating five hydroelectric plants on the Bear River-from Soda Springs, Idaho, to Beaver Dam in Box Elder County. Earlier, in 1921, Cache County irrigators and Utah Power and Light Company went to court over control of the tributary streams to the Bear River. The resulting Kimbad Decree of 1922 set the basic tenets pertaining to water rights throughout the county.66 Still, prob­lems over the use of the Bear River continued to plague the three states which shared its drainage. Furthermore, future developments on the river which depended on federal reclamation funds required that the three states of Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming come to an agree­ment over appropriation of the river's water. In 1955 the state legis­latures of all three states passed bills to authorize the creation of the Bear River Commission. The states also had come to terms on an agreement known as the Bear River Compact. President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the compact into law in 1958. The purpose of the compact, as outlined in the agreement, was: 328 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY Newton Dam, 1940s. (Special CoUections MerriU Library, USU) to remove the causes of present and future controversy over the distribution and use of the waters of the Bear River; to provide for efficient use of the water for multiple purposes; to permit addi­tional development of the water resources of Bear River; and to promote interstate comity.67 Since the decade of the 1980s, however, there has been a lack of comity, which has been as much within the states as among them. Brought on by urban and industrial growth from Cache County and continuing south along the Wasatch Front, renewed interest mounted for developing the state's unused portion of its Bear River Compact appropriation.68 Cache Valley citizens worried that Salt Lake County might move to construct water projects and export Bear River water to the Wasatch Front. Their response, first voiced in 1979 and again in 1989, was to attempt to form a countywide water conservancy dis­trict. Water conservancy districts had been legal extensions of local governments since their creation in 1941.69 District proponents claimed the county needed an organization to deal with other coun­tywide organizations as well as the state and federal governments. In 1989 opponents to the plan established a grass-roots organization- CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 329 People for Wise Water Planning (PWWP)-to combat passage of the district. It claimed that conservancy districts were simply a method used to construct large, expensive water projects with taxpayer dol­lars. It further claimed that most taxpayers would not benefit from these projects and that conservancy districts would therefore require the many to subsidize the few. Nevertheless, district proponents such as the late Professor Calvin Hibner of Utah State University felt that the district would provide the people of Cache County with much-needed "control over their own destiny."70 Paul Gdlette, deputy director of river-basin plan­ning with the Utah State Division of Water Resources, told the Herald Journal in 1989 that water conservancy districts had become the accepted manner for counties in the state to develop water resources, and that without a district Cache County would be operating at a disadvantage when negotiating with the state or with other counties. Gillette succinctly put the topic of water development into focus when he stated: "The Bear River is going to be developed because the political leaders of the state are not going to allow water to be a lim­iting factor for economic development in Utah untd we are out of it [water]."71 From Southern California to Las Vegas, Nevada, water had already become a limiting factor in some areas of the West. It promises to become an even greater factor as urban and industrial development continues. One way which local governments have tried to combat dwindling water supplies has been through heightening awareness of water conservation practices. From fixing leaky faucets to eliminating large todet tanks, conservationists have attempted to educate county residents about conservation.72 But at the same time that conservationists were championing the ideas of xeriscape yards, reduced-flow showerheads, and bricks in the todet tank, the county and state were talking about the immediate need of appropriating several hundred thousand additional acre feet of water from the Bear River.73 Water development wdl undoubtedly continue to play an impor­tant role in the county's future, just as it has played an important role in the past. Similarly, growth and development have always been at the forefront of county concerns. During the early years of the 330 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY county's history, the problem was always a lack of needed develop­ment- there was not enough population, there was too little indus­try, there were too few business and professionals. Ad that changed rapidly in Cache County, particularly since the close of World War II. The county emerged from being primardy an agricultural commu­nity to being a leader in the field of high-tech industry. Cache Valley has not yet seen the explosive growth experienced along the Wasatch Front; but the county, perhaps more than any of the other twenty-eight counties in the state, is poised for a simdar experience. Through the planning strategies begun over four decades ago and the contin­ued cooperation of an enlightened citizenry, Cache County is also poised to be able to choose the direction of its growth and future development. ENDNOTES 1. J.R. Mahoney, "Economic Changes in Utah During World War II," Utah Economic and Business Review 5 (June 1946): 6. 2. Ibid., 6-7. 3. Ibid., 15. 4. Utah Economic and Business Review 7 (December 1947): 53. 5. John R. Evans, "Utah's Changing Agricultural Economy," Utah Economic and Business Review 22 (May 1962): 4. 6. Ibid. 7. Gilbert D. Miller and E. Bruce Godfrey, Enterprise Budgets for Common Utah Crops by County (Logan: Utah Cooperative Extension Service, 1993), 37. 8. Utah State Agricultural Planning Committee, Preliminary Report on Utah's Agriculture During the Post-War Period (Logan: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, 1944), chs. 1-3. 9. John L. Powell, "The Role of Beet Growers in the Cache Valley Sugar Beet Industry," M.S. thesis, Utah State University, 1995, 74. 10. Frederick P. Champ, Papers, manuscript 50, USUSC; cited in PoweU, "The Role of Beet Growers," 74. 11. See Charles L. Schmalz, "Sugar Beets in Cache Valley: An Amalgamation of Agriculture and Industry," Utah Historical Quarterly 75 (Fall 1989): 371-88. 12. "News Release, January 4, 1972," Papers of the Franklin County Beet Growers, manuscript 205, USUSC. CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 331 13. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, "Conference on Pollution of Interstate Waters of the Bear River, Utah-Wyoming-Idaho. First session, October 8, 1958, Utah State University, Logan, Utah," 14-18, USUSC. 14. Ibid., 46. 15. Ibid., 47. 16. Preston Citizen (Preston, Idaho), 1 February 1995. 17. 1981 Utah Agricultural Statistics (Salt Lake City: Utah Department of Agriculture, 1981), 39. 18. Leonard J. Arrington, "A Sourcebook on the Economic History of Cache VaUey," 195, typescript, May 1956, Cache Valley Historical Society Archives, USUSC. 19. Wallace Parrish, "Co-op Cheese Brings Cash to Cache Valley," News for Farmer Cooperatives (Washington, D.C: USD A, 1970), 12. 20. AW. Chambers, memorandum to W.B. Robins, 27 June 1966, Papers of the Utah Cooperative Association, manuscript 129, USUSC. 21. Jay C. Andersen et al., "A Study of Meat Packing in Utah" (Logan: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, 1983), 30. 22. Salt Lake Tribune, 4 March 1995, C-9. 23. Preston Citizen, 1 February 1995. 24. Herald Journal, 15 February 1996. 25. See Scott Christensen, "A Short History of the Knitting Industry of Cache Valley With an Emphasis on Early Knitting Equipment," 2, USUSC; and Cache Chamber of Commerce, "Industrial Opportunities in Cache Valley, Utah," 15, pamphlet, USUSC. 26. Christensen, "A Short History of the Knitting Industry of Cache VaUey," 13. 27. Cache Chamber of Commerce, "Industrial Opportunities in Cache VaUey," 15. 28. Salt Lake Tribune, 13 January 1984, C-ll. 29. "OveraU Economic Development Program for Cache County, Utah, prepared for Title I Area Administration" (Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1975), 37. 30. See Cache Chamber of Commerce, "Industrial Opportunities in Cache Valley," 15; Deseret News, 23 June 1982; and Stanford O. Cazier, Papers, box 30, folder 4, USUSC. 31. Tim Gurrister, "High Tech Companies 'Spin-Off From USU," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 27 March 1988,4. 32. Ibid. 332 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY 33. Debbie Darby, "USU's Research Park Houses Local Companies," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 27 March 1988, 58. 34. RaeAnne Thayne, "Outside Ownership Increasing in Valley," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 25 March 1990,101. 35. Ibid., 100. 36. See Cindy Yurth, "Third Thursday Forum Report: Which Is Better, Big Business or Small Business," Cache Economic Development Newslette 6 (December 1990). 37. Statistical Summary of the City of Logan and Cache County, Utah (Logan: Logan City Library, 1994), 9. 38.1969 Statistical Abstract of Utah (Salt Lake City: University of Utah, 1969), 95. 39. Statistical Abstract of Utah, 1993 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah, 1993), 95. 40. 1969 Statistical Abstract of Utah, 71. 41. Statistical Abstract of Utah, 1993, 95. 42. Herald Journal, 13 January 1950, 2. 43. Logan City Zoning Ordinance, 1950, in "Survey of Cache VaUey Municipalities, 1956," manuscript 447, USUSC (hereafter referred to as Survey). 44. Herald Journal, 18 March 1950,6. 45. Survey. 46. Ibid. 47. Herald Journal, 17 March 1950. 48. Barbara Stoll Sinclair, "A Case Study of the Sewer Bond Issue in Logan, Utah, 1957-1965," Master's thesis: Utah State University, 1969,18. 49. "Conference on Pollution of Interstate Waters of the Bear River," 29. 50. A committee composed of Logan citizens contracted with local photographer Max Brunson to film the effects of pollution on the Bear River. According to Barbara StoU Sinclair, the film was shown to over 10,000 citizens within the county; it depicted graphic detaUs of "blood-red streams infested with rodents and insects thriving on city waste, and waterways laden with discharge from industrial plants and towns." Sinclair, A Case Study of the Sewer Bond Issue in Logan, 22, 43; see also RaeAnne Thayne, "Logan Improves Sewer System," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 26 March 1989, 80. 51. A.J. Simmonds, "Cache Valley Has Seen Several Hospitals," in Logan Regional Hospital, supplement to Cache Citizen (Logan, Utah), 19 November 1980,13. CACHE COUNTY SINCE WORLD WAR II 333 52. Ibid., 13-14. 53. Planning and Research Associates, Citizens Goals and Policies for Cache County, Utah and Lewiston, Richmond, North Logan, Smithfield, Providence: A Study for the Cache County Master Plan, September 1968 (Salt Lake City: Planning and Research Associates, 1968), introduction. 54. Planning and Research Associates, Master Plans for Cache County, Lewiston, North Logan, Providence, Richmond, River Heights, Smithfield (Salt Lake City: Planning and Research Associates, 1968), 1. 55. Ibid., 18. 56. 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), 50-53. 57. A.J. Simmonds, "Culinary Water Developed in Cache in Late 1800s," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 26 March 1989, 86. 58. R.A. Hart, "Report of the Drainage of Tract # 1, Smithfield, Utah" (Berkeley: U.S. Office of Public Roads and Rural Engineering, Drainage Division, 1916), 1. 59. In 1992 the Utah Supreme Court decided a case which involved a suit brought by a holder of a secondary water right against a holder of a pri­mary water right. In Steed v. 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, 6 November 1992, 4. 60. Samuel Fortier, "The Water Supply of Cache VaUey," Bulletin 50 (Logan: Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, 1896), 40. 61. William Peterson, "Ground Water Supply in Cache Valley, Utah Available for Domestic Use and Irrigation," New Circular Series 133 (Logan: Utah Cooperative Extension Service, 1944), 22. 62. L.J. McGreevy and L.J. Bjorkland, "Selected Hydrologic Data: Cache VaUey, Utah and Idaho," Utah Basic-Data Release 21 (Salt Lake City: U.S. Geological Survey, 1970), 18. 63. D. Michael Roark and Karen M. Hanson, "Selected Hydrologic Data for Cache VaUey, Utah and Idaho, 1969-1991," Utah Hydrologic-Data Report 48 (Salt Lake City: U.S. Geological Survey, 1992), 60. 64. Report of the Special Committee of the United States Senate on the Irrigation and Reclamation of Arid Lands, the Great Basin Region and California: Utah, Nevada, California and Arizona, 2 vols. (Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, 1890), 2:45. 334 HISTORY OF CACHE COUNTY 65. Gary WeUing, "Fielding: The People and the Events That Affected Their Lives" (n.p.), 75, 76, USUSC. 66. 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 Honorable James N. Kimball, District Judge (Logan, Utah, 1922), USUSC. 67. Bear River Compact and By-laws of the Bear River Commission: Entered Into By the States of Idaho, Utah and Wyoming (Salt Lake City: Bear River Commission, 1955), 1. 68. Ibid. An explanation of Utah's right to Bear River water is found in die Fifth Biennial Report: Bear River Commission, 1987-88, For the Biennium October 1,1986 to September 30,1988 (Logan: Bear River Commission), 27. 69. Senate BiU 234, effective 13 May 1941, made possible the creation of water conservancy districts in the state. See Laws of the State of Utah, 1941 (Salt Lake City; Utah State Legislature, 1941), ch. 99. 70. John J. Wise, "Controversy Surrounds Conservancy District," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 26 March 1989, 14. 71. Ibid., 15. 72. Christine A. Helpingstine, "Conserving Water," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 26 March 1989, 68. 73. John J. Wise, "Plan Would Export Water To Utah's Wasatch Front," Bridgerland Magazine (Herald Journal), 26 March 1989, 58.