Local conservationists urge Utah County to push back on proposed Utah Lake island development

Craig Christiansen of Conserv Utah Valley and BYU aquatic ecologist Ben Abbott told the Utah County Board of County Commissioners that a private proposal to create an archipelago of artificial islands in Utah Lake would be a major ecological and fiscal risk and asked the commission to take a leadership role calling for legislative changes.

Christiansen said the project — a proposal from a company called Lake Restoration Solutions referenced in the presentation — would privatize portions of Utah Lake bed and claimed to solve lake problems with dredging and construction of large islands. He said the proposal was made possible by a 2018 legislative amendment to House Bill 272 that created an alternative pathway allowing state land in and around Utah Lake to be disposed of in exchange for comprehensive restoration. Christiansen asked the commission to speak with state legislators and consider passing a resolution similar to recent unanimous actions by Provo and American Fork city councils asking for amendments.

Ben Abbott, an aquatic ecology professor at Brigham Young University, summarized scientific findings about Utah Lake’s history and its ecological importance. Abbott said the lake supports millions of migratory birds, thousands of species and helps regulate local climate and precipitation. He outlined four scientific takeaways: habitat and biodiversity have increased because of restoration projects; the June sucker fish has recovered enough to be downlisted; collaborative agreements have increased inflows; and harmful algal bloom metrics are improving overall though some areas such as Provo Bay still have problems.

Abbott warned of specific ecological risks if the private development proceeded: dredging and deepening the lake could produce hypoxic zones, release buried sediments that would impair water quality, alter evaporation patterns that feed regional precipitation, and undermine existing restoration practices. He also questioned the project’s financial claims, noting the company’s public fundraising had been small relative to the multi‑billion dollar investment it advertised, while he said the state had already provided a $10,000,000 loan guarantee and the company had sought nearly $893,000,000 in federal loan support but was not invited to submit a full proposal.

Both speakers urged transparency and a public, science‑based review. They said proponents had not engaged fully with the scientific community and that messaging from the project’s promoters risked undermining restoration progress. Commissioners responded by encouraging dialogue between proponents and opponents, acknowledging the county’s limited legal standing over sovereign lake bed but saying the county could nonetheless encourage legislative scrutiny and host or support public discussions.

The presentation concluded with the presenters offering to share slides and a BYU website with references; commissioners asked staff to accept materials and consider facilitating a public panel or meeting to better surface the science and policy options.