Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Never in a million years.

Point is theres got to be some kind of economically viable solution where some money-making industry could profit from having a lake at that particular location.

The real estate speculators had their run. Now what?

---

what do you mean by real estate speculators?

Me thinks you have never been on lake Dunlap.

TX AG 88 said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

Since when is Seguin the "heart of the Texas Hill Country"?

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2019/05/15/video-dam-collapses-in-heart-of-texas-hill-country/


And this is not a dam collapse. It is a gate failure. And journalists wonder why they get called fake news

---

FWIW:
Lake Dunlap is in New Braunfels
Lake Placid is in Seguin
Lake McQueeney is in-between

---

Technically, Lake Dunlap is New Braunfels. Culturally, it is more like Seguin. It sure as hell ain't "heart of the Hill Country.

They dammed the river in the 1930s. People bought land, subdivided it, more people moved there, taxes were paid, economy developed, property bought, sold and taxed on the basis of the lake.

The underlying industry was real estate.

Now there is no lake.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

They dammed the river in the 1930s. People bought land, subdivided it, more people moved there, taxes were paid, economy developed, property bought, sold and taxed on the basis of the lake.

The underlying industry was real estate.

Now there is no lake.

---

the damn was installed to provided electricity to the rural farms east of 46. The lake was a by product. The development around the lake reflects this. Your rant is strange.

If real estate speculation was the goal then the Guadalupe cattle company would have been sold shortly after 1998. Yet it has remained, virtually unused.

Yeah sure, most of Texas is like that. Agriculture, railroad and O&G laid the foundation for pretty much everything we see today. Point is that all thats been overtaken in the last 50 years. Now the driving force is people needing a place to live with a high quality of life while they work in the service economy.

I ain't trying to attack the place. Simply looking at wtf to do about a situation where something that was built for industrial purposes out off necessity in the 1930s becomes obsolete for the purpose it was constructed, a new economy develops around it and it disappears overnight and will cost 30 million and a few years to fix for what is essentially recreational / aesthetic purposes.

I aint got the answer, but am pointing out that as infrastructure ages out, we are gonna see the same problem a lot over the next 50 years.

lespaul said:

---

To me, Lake Dunlap isn't a lake. It is (was) simply a wide portion of the river. Look at google maps of the area and see if you can pick out a lake. Anyone else agree?

Interesting topic though. They artificially make the river wide, allowing rich folks to buy houses and put up docks for their boat while paying lots of property taxes. All of this depended upon on a 90 year old dam working. When it pooped the bed, now who pays for it? Just the "lake" people or everyone in town? What happens to property taxes in the meantime?

Crazy idea to throw out, do we really need to fix this thing? Is it needed in any way or just an excuse to make the river wider so that rich folks can boat on it?

I know the river owners would get screwed big time, but it might be cheaper to simply give them some of the property losses as opposed to rebuilding this. Just a guess.

what isn't mentioned is, tough as it sounds, people knew the risk of buying a house totally dependent upon an ancient dam working. Either they shouldn't have purchased or bought insurance to cover this sort of thing happening (or live with the hit now that it has failed). A few years ago, my family really wanted to live on either Dunlap or McQueeny (we looked at just about every house for sale). In the end I said absolutely not, too risky (I was more worried about flooding though, not the lake draining). Glad I stood firm,

My best guess is 3.5 years and 30 million before it is back to the old levels. Just a wild guess but when you get the gov't involved, that's the way things roll.

---

You do realize GRBA used Lake Dunlap as one of the sources for their drinking water supply, correct? That means a lot more people than just property owners ultimately benefit from the lake being in existence.

Pretty sure all the hydroelectric on these small dams are now shut down and they are only a damn. There is not enough flow to run a larger turbine. Same as Starke in Seguin, that was a power source back a long time ago. Now it is a dam only.

The people who have owned the Guadalupe Cattle Company the last decade plus are known to buy and hold properties while at the same time letting them deteriorate.

The property changed hands again almost a year ago or at least was reorganized coincidentally about the same major litigation was brought against the former owners.

There wasn't much to deteriorate post 1998

Agreed, I guess a better description than deteriorate would be to "junk out" the property.

Here is some interesting items from GBRA's public info site related to this.
https://www.gbra.org/documents/news/2018/041801.pdf

This is my favorite part of the document.

Quote:

---

The dam at Lake Dunlap received substantial repairs in 2012 and is believed to be in good operational condition and is not included in these scheduled repairs.

---

So basically the stewards of this system of dams did some research and determined that there are tons of expensive repairs across our system and we are trying to figure out how to pay for them but the good news is that we are solid on lake Dunlap.

Quote:

---

These small lakes have provided the area with recreation and local economic activity since the 1930s; however, the electricity generated and sold no longer provides the revenue needed to repair or maintain the existing system.

---

This part answers the hydro electric generation question

Quote:

---

The system was purchased by GBRA in 1963 and consists of six dams and associated hydroelectric generation stations that were put into service between 1928 and 1932 forming lakes Dunlap, McQueeney, Placid, Meadow, Gonzales and Wood.

---

I'd be a little nervous if I were sitting on McQueeney, Placid, or Meadow right now. I wonder what the impact of another failure would be in terms of human safety and property. I would be pretty nervous considering they are currently trying to fix the ones that they deemed worse than Dunlap.

Quote:

---

Hydro Dam Repair Schedule Update March 20, 2019 Rehabilitation continues to preserve the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority's (GBRA) 90-year-old hydroelectric system. Recent heavy rain and inflows, flood releases from Canyon Dam and the identification of additional needed repairs delayed work to the various dams and spillway gates. Additional parts are currently being fabricated and temporary repairs are being made to the existing spillgates until a permanent solution can be funded and constructed. Current estimates project repair work to continue through Fall 2019 with lake elevations impacted through the recreational season.

---

Temporary repair until we find funding sounds like a bad strategy when you have two dams that have sprung leaks.

Its concerning because it seems like the frequency of 500 year flood events in central Texas is about every 5 to 7 years now.

What would the repercussions be if you had a catastrophic failure during one of those major events?

Like the poster above mentioned regarding a dam failure almost putting Dallas under 10 ft of water. Same issue in Houston where they were a few inches away from having water over the top of their flood control dams.

Hate to say it, but we are likely to see something catastrophic happen in our lifetimes. Just seems to be escalating to that point when you step back and look at it.

All dams and all gates leak, it is a matter of leaking within acceptable limits or not.

All damns,and gates are under a constant state of maintenance and repair, it is the nature of the environment they are in.

schmellba99 said:

---

All dams and all gates leak, it is a matter of leaking within acceptable limits or not.

All damns,and gates are under a constant state of maintenance and repair, it is the nature of the environment they are in.

---

That all sounds perfectly reasonable but you have to scratch your head when two of the Dams you maintain have failed. I don't even really blame the river authority because they clearly don't have the money to maintain the system. I don't think a +30% failure rate is acceptable when you are in charge of dam safety.

schmellba99 said:

---

All dams and all gates leak, it is a matter of leaking within acceptable limits or not.

All damns,and gates are under a constant state of maintenance and repair, it is the nature of the environment they are in.

---

Your analysis here also applies to 53 / 71 series Detroit Diesel engines.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

All dams and all gates leak, it is a matter of leaking within acceptable limits or not.

All damns,and gates are under a constant state of maintenance and repair, it is the nature of the environment they are in.

---

Your analysis here also applies to 53 / 71 series Detroit Diesel engines.

---

Obscure reference. I like it.

Can anyone confirm whether or not Dunlap "lake" is needed for any reason (water, flood control other)? I don't care about 90 years ago when they built it, I'm just concerned about now.

In other words, is there any reason to rebuild the dam other than boating and property value ?

Definitely needed. Reasons below:

Recreation
Ecological
Environmental
Public space in a state nearly all privately owned
Tourism
Water treatment
Property tax
Flood control
Drinking water

Now go be an agitator elsewhere bc in this world every single bit of water is important.

evestor1 said:

---

Definitely needed. Reasons below:

Recreation
Ecological
Environmental
Public space in a state nearly all privately owned
Tourism
Water treatment
Property tax
Flood control
Drinking water

Now go be an agitator elsewhere bc in this world every single bit of water is important.

---

100%

evestor1 said:

---

Definitely needed. Reasons below:

Recreation
Ecological
Environmental
Public space in a state nearly all privately owned
Tourism
Water treatment
Property tax
Flood control
Drinking water

Now go be an agitator elsewhere bc in this world every single bit of water is important.

---

Asking a valid question is not an agitator. Is the AMOUNT of the above reasons you have listed worth the pricetag to fix? I think a cost/benefit analysis for the small quantities/amounts of all of the above you receive will find it lacking. The answer needs to be a lower cost solution.

He is doing that as an agitator.

Recreation - brings 1000s of heads each weekend to local restaurants, bars, and shops. Lose jobs and revenue here

Ecological - the government values this very high. Most people do as well. Losing 1000s of 100 year old cypress is a true tragedy to me.

Environmental - same as above

Public space in a state nearly all privately owned - this is worth millions. This state is so heavy on private land use that having a place for public to do things is priceless. I'd argue that if a public lie is taken away over 50mm then we should start taking back easier land for public use. My favorite states to visit have massive public areas for hiking and fishing and hunting. We do not.

Tourism - hire an economist and ask what tourism is worth. It's probably millions in tax dollars from business earnings.

Water treatment - can't tell you this one. Maybe just dump the water into the ocean.

Property tax - 200 waterfront property owners. Avg of 20k tax each year = 4mm per year. Add in value for waterfront hoods and houses with a view and you could probably double that 4mm. Take away the lake and that will be 50% revenue loss each year in perpetuity.

Flood control - eff everyone. Let's flood everyone downstream for a mile each direction. FEMA probably has a cost for you but I don't

Drinking water - let's drink Brawndo. Not only the water they sell but existing wells will be hurt by this.


A 50 million fix is cheap compared to losing probably 5-10 mill in tax revenue per year, ruining an ecological habitats, and taking away recreation opportunities for a giant area. Fixing a lake is about more than the 200 lakefront properties.

Quite the WAG

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Quite the WAG

---

not really and evestor knows what he is talking about.

NB has a 13.5% occupancy tax. The courtyard by Marriott on the river would certainly lose a ton of revenue without the lake.

Ragoo said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Quite the WAG

---

not really and evestor knows what he is talking about.

---

I'm sure he is an expert but that list was filled with emotional pleas, completely made up "stats", and (admittedly) several items that seem like they might be true. So, a typical policltician - weave some truth with a lot of BS and emotional pleas.

Surprised to see people get so riled up over asking a question. It seems like the biggest reasons given are the financial benefits of the dam. That maybe true. If it is, then one more question. Why not have dams the entire length of the Guadalupe to make it one giant "lake"? In other words, if it is a positive business model to have a "lake" why not scale that mode up ?

Also can anyone confirm the flood control and drinking water claims? Honest question.

Topography

Sounds reasonable.

Also like the idea that someone suggested about putting in a slalom course while the lake is down.

One of those with the overhead cable system so no boat necessary. You can show up and ski.

I bet that would make some money about 9 months a year and would get some outside investment dollars to construct.

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Quite the WAG

---

not really and evestor knows what he is talking about.

---

I'm sure he is an expert but that list was filled with emotional pleas, completely made up "stats", and (admittedly) several items that seem like they might be true. So, a typical policltician - weave some truth with a lot of BS and emotional pleas.

---

quit being an ignorant asshat.

lespaul said:

---

Surprised to see people get so riled up over asking a question. It seems like the biggest reasons given are the financial benefits of the dam. That maybe true. If it is, then one more question. Why not have dams the entire length of the Guadalupe to make it one giant "lake"? In other words, if it is a positive business model to have a "lake" why not scale that mode up ?

---

seriously? WTF kind of postnis this.

Never thought a discussion of a dam failure and what to do about it could get so heated.

But ... here we are.

I would wager that the vast majority of Dunlap recreational users are property owners. Sure, the Marriott may host some overnight guests who come to town to fish, tube, ski, etc. on Dunlap.

Is there another public launch aside from the one under 35? The narrow, riverine lake is 8 miles long. I could be wrong but if there is just the one ramp, I would be surprised if Dunlap is a major destination reservoir that is heavily used by non property owners.

I could be wrong.

Dunlap serves as a water supply reservoir for part of Hays County.

SanAntoneAg said:

---

I would wager that the vast majority of Dunlap recreational users are property owners. Sure, the Marriott may host some overnight guests who come to town to fish, tube, ski, etc. on Dunlap.

Is there another public launch aside from the one under 35? The narrow, riverine lake is 8 miles long. I could be wrong but if there is just the one ramp, I would be surprised if Dunlap is a major destination reservoir that is heavily used by non property owners.

I could be wrong.

---

i would say the vast majority are property owners within a 5 mile radius I agree.

Without the lake though those property owners may not choose to live in the area. Without the lake the value of the nearby property is significantly lower.

The city should put of significant dollars to protect their tax revenue.