Looking for proof damming increased natural height of Lake Winnipesaukee.
 

Does anyone have proof/evidence of how many feet the damming at Lakeport raised the height of Lake Winnipesaukee?
I need historic photos showing land where there is now water, old newsprint describing the increased dam height, maps showing land where water now exists, any way it can shown damming raised the height of Lake Winnipesaukee.

The first 3 dams were built and controlled by commercial business; the first of wood in 1766, replaced with wood in 1828, the third was rock in 1851, the current dam built in 1949; in 1958 the dam was taken over by the State of New Hampshire.

Any help will be much appreciated.

Discussed somewhere before
 

Didn't search for it, but do recall a forum discussion on this issue. I had the same question a while back and came to the conclusion that the height of the lake was pretty much driven by the amount of water that could pass through the original Weirs channel and the dam merely enlarged Paugus Bay while raising the lake only a few feet.

Rocks Ahead!
 

This site seems to be very comprehensive, disclosing that the Lake Winnipesaukee water level had been raised from 5 to 12 feet. (Which is consistent with what I'd heard from my Dad, and some other longtime residents).

http://www.weirsbeach.com/topten/reason9frame.html

At the original (low) level, the range of boats on the lake would have to have been very small. Rocks Ahead! :eek:

BTW: Is this a legal matter?

:confused:

.

I believe the dam raised the normal elevation at that point by about 10 feet. The Weirs channel used to be a rapids now it is deep enough for any boat that can fit under the bridge. Elevation on the main body of the lake is something like 5 feet higher than before the dam was built.

Perhaps somebody who has the history book will chime in with the exact figure, if not there are several books you can peak into if you go in to a local bookstore. Surprisingly, this information is not listed on the Winnipesaukee page on Wikipedia.

Not to sure . . .
 

how far back you are referring to. I have a pic of a camp (Smith Cove) from 1940 and the water height is fairly the same as it is today. Baring the time of year, it varies about 1' to 2'. So I don't think that would help.

Go to the historical society. I'm certain they have tons of pics. Good luck in your research.

Here you go
 

Looks like 3-5 ft based on what RG posted many years back after her research in the Library of Congress.
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...read.php?t=931

I had forgotten much of what was in that thread. An interesting article that McDude posted about the watershed outlet running through Alton instead of Lakeport states that the lake used to be about 35 ft higher.

It was this thread that morphed into the first one and not surprisingly has FLL posts being scrutinized.
http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...d.php?p=142795

Here's an updated link to the WeirsBeach.com page referenced above. Scroll all the way down to see a map of the lake showing the original shoreline "...before THE INVADING COLONISTS DAMMED THE FALLS".

If you want to PM me your email address I will scan and email you copies of testimony I have from proceedings in the late 40's early 50's on this issue. They indicate that while Paugus Bay might have been raised the Lake itself was not raised by damming. The channel was dredged to allow the old mill companies to draw the lake down further than it naturally could have been. More drawdown capacity meant more hydropower for the mills. As the mills became less of an economic power and tourism became more of one the deep drawdowns became an issue and in the 40's the legislature stepped in and passed a law limiting the level to which the mill could lower the lake during the summer.

Makes sense
 

That makes much more sense, Shore Things. The claim of 5-12' lower in the earlier article definitely conflicts with the description and existence of a natural waterfall at the Weirs and the later need for dredging of the channel.

Amiright?
 

Another thread here on the subject:

Raised, apparently, two hundred-plus years ago.

That might explain the present day shoreline's slow, but continuous "rain" of falling trees from relatively steeper shores.

Two hundred years of rocks and boulders being moved against the shoreline by centuries of thick ice—a relatively short time of geological history.

:confused: