Figure 1 The Guadalupe Watershed
Water for consumption by man and beast was a primary use from the very beginning especially in the area from the 100th meridian and westward where rainfall is sparse. As a result, all the settlements cropped up on the riverbank or some of its small creek tributaries.
When the Europeans moved into the central part of Texas, they looked to the Guadalupe for power. They brought with them the ideas of the water powered mill because they saw the opportunity to use the changing elevation as an advantage in building a small dam and harnessing the water for powering a mill.
Power generated from rivers was the main, source of power---other than the human back, the ox, and the horse. In early times river power was by far the most capable as it could accomplish big jobs like run sawmills, grind corn and later, in the 1800s, to gin cotton. In those times, power from the Guadalupe River was generated through the initiative of individuals who built these installations, often from components imported from their home countries in Europe. This required building a dam to raise the elevation of the water, a millrace to direct the water into a wheel that drove the mill, and so on. All this work was done by individuals, never by governments. Governments in this era did not undertake projects of this nature.
A water powered mill is simple in concept but can have many design differences. The basic concept is to create a rotating shaft from flowing water. Here is an interesting way to look at the mechanical process. We all know about the engine that turns a shaft which turns a wheel---that’s the car. Reverse all this and envision a wheel that turns a shaft that makes an engine. That’s a water powered mill.
The two figures below are the two of the most common ways to configure a water powered mill.
Figure 2 The overshot wheel
Both wheels require a significant level of water in a dam to accommodate a large wheel. The overshot wheel captures about 50 % of the total energy of the water passing over the wheel.
The backshot wheel is a bit more efficient because it can make use of the flowing water at the bottom of the wheel. (not like this drawing, so just imagine the lower part of the wheel in the flowing water)
Once the “motor” of the mill is built, then it’s rotating shaft can be used to power all sorts of machines to accomplish grinding, sawing, or cotton ginning.
Figure 4 is a drawing of how a water wheel can be used to grind corn. The early mills were made from what we would see today as very crude components.
Figure 3 Backshot water wheel
 |
Building a mill was a financially risky investment because mills were often ruined by floods on the rivers; floods of such magnitude that they were impossible to foresee. Many mills were rebuilt on the same location, but many were not because the builder of the mill realized that the location would always be subject to loss from flooding. So, many of the mills that once existed became lost from history. We can count at least 15 mills that were built on the Guadalupe River but there were probably several more than that. There seems to be an unusual scarcity of written record of these mills.
Early settlers, in deciding where to place the power generating part of the mill, had to consider what needed to be milled, simply because the mill could not be moved to the location of what needed to be processed, whether it was grain, wood or whatever.. Thus, a mill had to be placed where there was an existing need, not vice versa.
For example, John Sherman built a mill on the upper reaches of the Guadalupe, above Kerrville, at the junction with Kelly Creek in the early 1800s. This watershed had a vast growth of very large cypress trees and the settlers cut the trees using a water powered mill and made roof shingles from the cut logs. The roof shingle market was good in San Antonio so there were several sawmills on the upper Guadalupe built to make shingles. This water wheel, like those commonly built, was constructed to be flexible as a motor for a variety of uses. That is, the wheel could power a sawmill, a grist mill for grinding corn, or even to gin cotton. This mill did all those operations except cotton ginning. (Cotton as we know does not grow well in limestone rock found in the Hill Country). Sherman’s mill was destroyed in a flood of 1932.
Christian Dietert built a mill in Kerrville using the skills of a German artisan who was brought over to Texas specifically for his mill building proficiency. The mill lasted for several years and was purchased and later enlarged by Charles Schreiner, a well-known Kerrville settler. This mill also no longer exists.
Another mill was built by Adolph Guenther where Live Oak Creek joins the Guadalupe. It was wrecked by such a severe flood that all the equipment was washed several miles downstream and is lost until someone can dig it up. Someone will find it someday.
Privately owned mills for local use began to disappear in the early 1900s. Steam engine and diesel engine power began to replace waterpower due to the inherent portability of these new modes of power generation, the reliability of power and the scale of operation. Then, as electrical power distribution began to take hold, electric motor power displaced steam engine and diesel engine power.
All the dams built to provide waterpower to milling operations were of modest height. However, around 1930 the government built five small dams on the Guadalupe River below New Braunfels to generate electricity. These were different, the base was made of concrete and each was equipped with generators and fitted with steel gates that could rotate open to release flood waters. This was a viable project then as the state was in between the eras of waterpower and power generated by fossil fuels.
Figure 5 Map showing location of five dams
These five dams created very small reservoirs that provided the height for generating power, but held very little water.Figure 6 is a photo from the shoreline of Lake Gonzales showing the dam and powerhouse.
Figure 6 Lake Gonzales just above the dam
The trees on the right side of the photo are on the opposite shore of the lake, so this shows the smallness of the reservoirs. None stored much water as can be seen from the map of Figure 5, but all were equipped with electrical generating equipment. Starting from New Braunfels and going down river, there is Lake Dunlap, Lake McQueeney, Lake Placid, Lake Gonzalez and Lake Wood. These dams are now 90 years old and beginning to show signs of failure. Not total failure, but failure of the flood gates that are the upper part of the dam that is rotatable in order to be able to lower the height of the dam in case of river flooding. Lake Wood failed four years ago, and Lake Dunlap failed this past May.
This is what the Lake Wood Dam looks like from below. If you look at the facing of the concrete wall, by the powerhouse, you can see the outline of the upside-down vee shaped structure that formed the flood gate, which was never replaced after it failed.
Figure 7 Lake Wood Dam from below
The governing body of these lakes, the Guadalupe Blanco River Authority (GBRA) wants to lower the water level in all these dams because of the concern for failure of the floodgates of the other three. Today, since two of these dams have had their flood gates fail, the GBRA plan is to dewater the other three dams and inspect for safety issues. And, if truth be known, the GBRA would probably prefer to remove all the flood gates and thus decommission the dams. This is not a popular idea with those people who have homes on the shores of these reservoirs.
The electricity generated from these five dams is insignificant compared to total demand of the state; the value of the electricity generated does not cover the maintenance of the dam structure. The GBRA has little incentive to maintain the dams at their current level because, as they say, the current condition is a safety issue and the need for additional maintenance is required. The residents contend that the safety issue caused by sudden release of water is way overblown because the amount of water held by the dam’s flood gates if suddenly released is insignificant compared to normal flooding. Presently, the courts have issued an injunction which puts a hold on the emptying of the other three lakes for at least 12 months. The injunction also stipulates that the lakes will be closed to all surface activity beginning Thursday, September 19, 2019. A panel of 3 experts will be chosen; 1 from GBRA, 1 representing the plaintiffs and 1 chosen by both. The panel of 3 will have 30 days to determine what areas, if any, are safe for activity. The 30-day time period can be extended for another 30 days if needed. Professional law enforcement, acting as lake patrol, will be added to enforce the restrictions on each lake. After the failure of the Lake Placid floodgate, the water level of Lake Gonzales has been lowered two feet from normal which is where it stands today. The safety issue is more complex than described here, because one of the problems encountered by the GBRA is that after passing regulations that bar people from the dam structure area, recreational people flaunt these rules. No telling what will happen if people neglect to obey the rules set forth in the injunction.
Today, the only viable power generation on the Guadalupe River is Canyon Dam. In addition to power generation the dam is also used for flood control, recreation and storage of water which is then sold to cities and to rice farmers along the coast. Storage of water supplies for cities will dominate in the future and so, given the option, the reservoir will retain the water and not be discharged for electrical generation.
Waterpower in the area has become insignificant relative to the power consumed by the state, so it begs the question of how significant is our waterpower today compared to total demand? Just as an aside, let’s look at power generation in our state and compare it to all hydroelectric power and to the power available from the Guadalupe.
The available power from a river is easily calculated from water flow rates and the change in elevation. Obviously, when river flow rates decrease then power capability is diminished. Very roughly though, we calculate the Guadalupe River’s total potential is about 40,000 horsepower providing all the change in elevation from Kerrville to the Gulf is utilized and the water flow rate is “normal”. When that is considered, the potential power of the Guadalupe is equivalent to about one aircraft jet engine’s output when travelling at 400 mph. But even more dramatic, just one large natural gas turbine/steam turbine power generator can produce 15 times the power of the river. Thus, hydroelectric power has almost disappeared in the Lone Star State.
This graph shown as Figure 8 puts that in perspective.
Figure 8 Power sources in Texas 2017
The scale on this graph, given the size of some of the sources of power, hydroelectric power does not even get off the baseline.
We have chosen to end this article with a repurposed mill and power plant in Seguin on the Guadalupe River. The Seguin Mill was built on the Saffold Dam in the late 1800s for milling grain and ginning cotton, but then was converted by Henry Troell in 1894 to an electrical generating plant for the City of Seguin.
This transformation from a water powered mill of grains to an electrical generating station is a good example of changing times. Grain milling was probably in decline in the area and the opportunity to generate electricity prevailed.
Below is a photo of the dam and associated powerhouse where the electrical generator is located. From the photo, it appears that the horizontal underwater wheel turned the vertical shaft connected to the power unit.
Figure 9 Seguin Power Plant at Saffold Dam
This photo (Figure 9) shows the tall structure where the generator is located. It is in the tower at the upper end of the vertical shaft. Next, in Figure 10, is a picture of the generator located in the tower. It was driven by the upper end of the wheel shaft.
Figure 10 Generator at Seguin Power Plant
Figure 11 Busch Sulzer Diesel Engine
Figure 12 Powerplant Texas Grill from across the river
Sightings
The lack of rainfall has kept most opportunities for sightings depressed, but we did find some flowers not seen before by us when we visited the Guadalupe River dams. In other words, since the water did not come to us, we had to go to the water to see some plants not seen before. Here in the water of the Guadalupe at Gonzales dam, we found these two plants growing in about foot of water. We have identified these two flowering water plants as labelled.
Figure 13 Water Hyacinth. eichhornia crassipes
Figure 14 Mexican Primrose Willow ludwigia octovalvis
