Peter's Canyon, The Jeauits, and the Lost Dutchman

[LDWhitneyAuthor]

Greetings everyone,

Quick introduction: my name is LD Whitney and I'm an author of fictional adventure thrillers. I'm researching for a novel that combines some of my favorite Arizona Legends about the Jesuits and the Lost Dutchman Mine.

While reading "the Sterling Legend" the author mentions on page 32 that Peter's Canyon fits a number of Dutchman Clues but not all (because none do). I see a lot of focus on Weever's Needle, La Barge Canyon, and so on, but why not Peter's?

I'm currently trying to work out some kind of clue that would lead my main characters to Peter's Canyon above the other well tread options.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Greetings everyone,

Quick introduction: my name is LD Whitney and I'm an author of fictional adventure thrillers. I'm researching for a novel that combines some of my favorite Arizona Legends about the Jesuits and the Lost Dutchman Mine.

While reading "the Sterling Legend" the author mentions on page 32 that Peter's Canyon fits a number of Dutchman Clues but not all (because none do). I see a lot of focus on Weever's Needle, La Barge Canyon, and so on, but why not Peter's?

I'm currently trying to work out some kind of clue that would lead my main characters to Peter's Canyon above the other well tread options.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

In the early 1980's Mike Bilbrey and Ed Farr found two stone crosses buried at the head of Peters canyon. Bilbrey had read Estee Conatser,s book the Sterling Legend and was searching using her book as a guide.
Bilbrey later filed 8 mining claims where he found the crosses. He applied for a treasure trove permit on his claims.
The Tonto Forest Service checked his mine claims and determined there was enough mineralization to allow him to legally continue mining the claims.
In 2009 Jesse Capen, a Colorado searcher for a lost mine fell to his death from a cliff directly above Bilbrey's mining claims. Capen had read and was following clues from the book the Sterling Legend just as Bilbrey had.

 

[LDWhitneyAuthor]

In the early 1980's Mike Bilbrey and Ed Farr found two stone crosses buried at the head of Peters canyon. Bilbrey had read Estee Conatser,s book the Sterling Legend and was searching using her book as a guide.
Bilbrey later filed 8 mining claims where he found the crosses. He applied for a treasure trove permit on his claims.
The Tonto Forest Service checked his mine claims and determined there was enough mineralization to allow him to legally continue mining the claims.
In 2009 Jesse Capen, a Colorado searcher for a lost mine fell to his death from a cliff directly above Bilbrey's mining claims. Capen had read and was following clues from the book the Sterling Legend just as Bilbrey had.

This is excellent information. I hadn't read anything about Bilbrey! Are there any books or articles that have more information abou the stone crosses?

 

[Matthew Roberts]

There is a detailed account of the Bilbrey stone cross discovery. It is long and cannot be cut and pasted here but can be messaged to your LD WHITNEY fb page if that is acceptable.
Photo is original of the stone crosses.

 

[LDWhitneyAuthor]

There is a detailed account of the Bilbrey stone cross discovery. It is long and cannot be cut and pasted here but can be messaged to your LD WHITNEY fb page if that is acceptable.
Photo is original of the stone crosses.

Sure thing! That's acceptable to me. Much appreciated!

 

[Clay Diggins]

Bilbrey later filed 8 mining claims where he found the crosses. He applied for a treasure trove permit on his claims.
The Tonto Forest Service checked his mine claims and determined there was enough mineralization to allow him to legally continue mining the claims.

This is untrue. There have been no mining claims in that area since 1964 when the Superstition Wilderness was created and mining claims were prohibited. Also the mining claim records show that no one by the name Bilbrey ever located a mining claim in Arizona.

Additionally the Forest Service does not check mining claims for mineralization nor do they have a right to prevent the mining of valid mining claims.

Maybe you were thinking of another Peters canyon in a different state?

 

[Matthew Roberts]

This is untrue. There have been no mining claims in that area since 1964 when the Superstition Wilderness was created and mining claims were prohibited. Also the mining claim records show that no one by the name Bilbrey ever located a mining claim in Arizona.

Additionally the Forest Service does not check mining claims for mineralization nor do they have a right to prevent the mining of valid mining claims.

Maybe you were thinking of another Peters canyon in a different state?

Bilbrey filed 8 mining claims in his Peters canyon area before the December 31, 1983 moratorium on claims went into effect. No claims were allowed after that date.
Mining claims filed before that date were honored. The Forest Service went out after that date and examined all claims filed before the December 31st 1983 deadline.
Bilbreys claims were the LD (Lost Dutchman) numbers 1 - 8. His locations of the claims were filed at the Maricopa County Recorders office and copies of those claims have been posted on this and other forums.
I believe it was Donald Van Dreil , Tonto NFS who approved Bilbrey to continue with his claims.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

This is untrue. There have been no mining claims in that area since 1964 when the Superstition Wilderness was created and mining claims were prohibited. Also the mining claim records show that no one by the name Bilbrey ever located a mining claim in Arizona.

Additionally the Forest Service does not check mining claims for mineralization nor do they have a right to prevent the mining of valid mining claims.

Maybe you were thinking of another Peters canyon in a different state?

Clay,
Here is the location page for the mining claims Bilbrey filed at the head of Peters canyon.
He filed with both Maricopa County Recorder and the BLM.
In December 1984 Bilbrey filed a notice to hold his mining claim AMC 189723.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

This is untrue. There have been no mining claims in that area since 1964 when the Superstition Wilderness was created and mining claims were prohibited. Also the mining claim records show that no one by the name Bilbrey ever located a mining claim in Arizona.

Additionally the Forest Service does not check mining claims for mineralization nor do they have a right to prevent the mining of valid mining claims.

Maybe you were thinking of another Peters canyon in a different state?

Clay,
Here is the mine claim location cover page Bilbrey filed at the Maricopa County Recorders office.
And his intent to hold his mining claim AMC 189723 filed with the BLM.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Clay,
Here is the mine claim location cover page Bilbrey filed at the Maricopa County Recorders office.
And his intent to hold his mining claim AMC 189723 filed with the BLM.

There are several problems with the paperwork you are showing.

1. The location notice has no indication it was ever recorded, it should have the recorder's stamp and date at the top.
2. The location notice has no BLM stamp or BLM serial number.
3. The notice of intent to hold is not filed or stamped by the BLM and was filed too late in the year to be valid. The cutoff date is December 30th (Federal Law) notices filed after that date always result in the claim being void.
4. The claim AMC189723 was not located by Bilbrey.
5. Maricopa County has no documents recorded under the name Michael Kent Bilbrey, Michael Bilbrey or Kent Bilbrey.
6. There are no claims located by a Brilby in the BLM database or Maricopa County records.
7. Claim AMC189723 was rejected and declared void by the BLM within two weeks of receipt (first review) due to being in an area not open to mining claims (wilderness).
8. The locators of AMC189723 appealed the rejection of the claim but never followed up in the administrative court so the claim was certified closed and "CLAIM INVALID" after the mandatory waiting period. The "notice of intent" you show was dated 4 months after the the final rejection of the claim.
9. Claim AMC189723 was not located in Peters Canyon - it was located north of there on Peters trail.

What you have shared here are some papers that sort of support your theory but on closer look are just pieces of paper with no authority or provenance. They might have some information that could help a researcher (like the fact the invalid claim wasn't located in Peters Canyon). Beyond that they are proof of nothing but that someone wrote on some paper purporting to be a claim location notice and a notice of intent by a Bilbrey.

Hopefully that will help your search. It's really frustrating to follow up on leads that don't go anywhere but I think it's safe to say this void mining claim doesn't support the narrative. If you can accept that it will save you a lot of time chasing rabbit trails to nowhere.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

There are several problems with the paperwork you are showing.

1. The location notice has no indication it was ever recorded, it should have the recorder's stamp and date at the top.
2. The location notice has no BLM stamp or BLM serial number.
3. The notice of intent to hold is not filed or stamped by the BLM and was filed too late in the year to be valid. The cutoff date is December 30th (Federal Law) notices filed after that date always result in the claim being void.
4. The claim AMC189723 was not located by Bilbrey.
5. Maricopa County has no documents recorded under the name Michael Kent Bilbrey, Michael Bilbrey or Kent Bilbrey.
6. There are no claims located by a Brilby in the BLM database or Maricopa County records.
7. Claim AMC189723 was rejected and declared void by the BLM within two weeks of receipt (first review) due to being in an area not open to mining claims (wilderness).
8. The locators of AMC189723 appealed the rejection of the claim but never followed up in the administrative court so the claim was certified closed and "CLAIM INVALID" after the mandatory waiting period. The "notice of intent" you show was dated 4 months after the the final rejection of the claim.
9. Claim AMC189723 was not located in Peters Canyon - it was located north of there on Peters trail.

What you have shared here are some papers that sort of support your theory but on closer look are just pieces of paper with no authority or provenance. They might have some information that could help a researcher (like the fact the invalid claim wasn't located in Peters Canyon). Beyond that they are proof of nothing but that someone wrote on some paper purporting to be a claim location notice and a notice of intent by a Bilbrey.

Hopefully that will help your search. It's really frustrating to follow up on leads that don't go anywhere but I think it's safe to say this void mining claim doesn't support the narrative. If you can accept that it will save you a lot of time chasing rabbit trails to nowhere.

Clay,

Don't know what you're looking at but the County recorder and State of Arizona, / BLM stamp boxes are clearly shown on the paperwork.
You seem to have some sort of chip on your shoulder but you are wrong on what you simply are trying to say.
The Bilbrey claims and crosses has been well documented for several decades.
If anyone is interested in the true evidence Google,
Desert USA
The Story of the stone crosses.
All the documents and photos and newspaper articles are there for everyone to see.
Sorry Clay but you can't argue with the facts no matter how much you want to.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

There are several problems with the paperwork you are showing.

1. The location notice has no indication it was ever recorded, it should have the recorder's stamp and date at the top.
2. The location notice has no BLM stamp or BLM serial number.
3. The notice of intent to hold is not filed or stamped by the BLM and was filed too late in the year to be valid. The cutoff date is December 30th (Federal Law) notices filed after that date always result in the claim being void.
4. The claim AMC189723 was not located by Bilbrey.
5. Maricopa County has no documents recorded under the name Michael Kent Bilbrey, Michael Bilbrey or Kent Bilbrey.
6. There are no claims located by a Brilby in the BLM database or Maricopa County records.
7. Claim AMC189723 was rejected and declared void by the BLM within two weeks of receipt (first review) due to being in an area not open to mining claims (wilderness).
8. The locators of AMC189723 appealed the rejection of the claim but never followed up in the administrative court so the claim was certified closed and "CLAIM INVALID" after the mandatory waiting period. The "notice of intent" you show was dated 4 months after the the final rejection of the claim.
9. Claim AMC189723 was not located in Peters Canyon - it was located north of there on Peters trail.

What you have shared here are some papers that sort of support your theory but on closer look are just pieces of paper with no authority or provenance. They might have some information that could help a researcher (like the fact the invalid claim wasn't located in Peters Canyon). Beyond that they are proof of nothing but that someone wrote on some paper purporting to be a claim location notice and a notice of intent by a Bilbrey.

Hopefully that will help your search. It's really frustrating to follow up on leads that don't go anywhere but I think it's safe to say this void mining claim doesn't support the narrative. If you can accept that it will save you a lot of time chasing rabbit trails to nowhere.

Clay,
I looked up the name of the Tonto Forest Service agent who was charged with verifying mining claims in the Superstition Wilderness after December 31, 1983.
Lawrence Soehlig wrote the Bilbrey findings aided by Donald VanDriel.
Both men are still living in Mesa / Apache Junction.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Feel free to believe what you wish Matthew. All beliefs are permitted in a free society. This forum is a reflection of that principle.

I have no chip on my shoulder. I am a professional full time Landman. I research, document, verify and map more than 8,000 existing mining claims a year. I have a full working copy of the entire BLM database that I update from the BLM secure server twice a month. It's essential in my profession that we don't rely on opinion but provide proof.

Here's a link to the BLM records for ALL the Lost Dutchman claims you are studying. This is the entire list of actions taken by the BLM on AMC189723 and all associated claims. It's called a lead serial register page and if there were more than one claim they would all be listed on this report. ALL actions related to the claim/claim group are listed on the serial register page. As you can see there was only ever one location claimed and it was rejected without a mineral examination.

Only the BLM is authorized to do mining claim mineral validation on federal lands. The BLM is an agency of the Department of Interior (DOI).
The Forest Service has no such function because they are exclusively surface managers. The Forest Service is an agency of the Department of Agriculture (USDA).
The DOI and USDA are entirely different Departments within the government and they have entirely different missions assigned to them by Congress.
The Forest Service can do their own mineral examination but it doesn't affect the validity of a mining claim in the Wilderness or anywhere else. The BLM manages the entire mineral estate on public lands no matter which agency manages the surface.

From the Forest Service (USDA) Manual:

The most common legal action is a contest of claim validity which is conducted by and under the
regulations of the Department of the Interior (BLM). To that Department, Congress has given
adjudicative powers in matters relating to all the land laws, including the mining laws. The
decision in a mining claim contest is a formal determination of validity. The authority of the
Department of the Interior to rule on claim validity was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Best
v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co., 371 US 334 (1963).

A Forest Service supervisor can request the BLM do a mineral examination claim validity contest but they can't do one themselves. As you can see from the original complete BLM record linked above there was no mineral examination ordered or attempted on the "claims" you are studying.

See - you got a free lesson from a professional on how to determine the history of a mining claim. Isn't TNet grand? I hope that will help you in your ongoing research.

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Feel free to believe what you wish Matthew. All beliefs are permitted in a free society. This forum is a reflection of that principle.

I have no chip on my shoulder. I am a professional full time Landman. I research, document, verify and map more than 8,000 existing mining claims a year. I have a full working copy of the entire BLM database that I update from the BLM secure server twice a month. It's essential in my profession that we don't rely on opinion but provide proof.

Here's a link to the BLM records for ALL the Lost Dutchman claims you are studying. This is the entire list of actions taken by the BLM on AMC189723 and all associated claims. It's called a lead serial register page and if there were more than one claim they would all be listed on this report. ALL actions related to the claim/claim group are listed on the serial register page. As you can see there was only ever one location claimed and it was rejected without a mineral examination.

Only the BLM is authorized to do mining claim mineral validation on federal lands. The BLM is an agency of the Department of Interior (DOI).
The Forest Service has no such function because they are exclusively surface managers. The Forest Service is an agency of the Department of Agriculture (USDA).
The DOI and USDA are entirely different Departments within the government and they have entirely different missions assigned to them by Congress.
The Forest Service can do their own mineral examination but it doesn't affect the validity of a mining claim in the Wilderness or anywhere else. The BLM manages the entire mineral estate on public lands no matter which agency manages the surface.

From the Forest Service (USDA) Manual:

The most common legal action is a contest of claim validity which is conducted by and under the
regulations of the Department of the Interior (BLM). To that Department, Congress has given
adjudicative powers in matters relating to all the land laws, including the mining laws. The
decision in a mining claim contest is a formal determination of validity. The authority of the
Department of the Interior to rule on claim validity was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Best
v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co., 371 US 334 (1963).

A Forest Service supervisor can request the BLM do a mineral examination claim validity contest but they can't do one themselves. As you can see from the original complete BLM record linked above there was no mineral examination ordered or attempted on the "claims" you are studying.

See - you got a free lesson from a professional on how to determine the history of a mining claim. Isn't TNet grand? I hope that will help you in your ongoing research.

Yes, ..."Feel free to believe what you want Clay. All beliefs are permitted in a free society. This forum is a reflectiontion of that principle".
Have a great day Clay.

 

[Clay Diggins]

I didn't state any belief or opinion Matthew - just verifiable facts readily available in the public domain.

I'll take your statement at face value and say you are welcome to use the results of my pro bono work on these claims if you should ever be inclined to look beyond your obviously firmly held beliefs.

Best of luck on your search.

 

[markmar]

I didn't state any belief or opinion Matthew - just verifiable facts readily available in the public domain.

I'll take your statement at face value and say you are welcome to use the results of my pro bono work on these claims if you should ever be inclined to look beyond your obviously firmly held beliefs.

Best of luck on your search.

Doesn't matter if Bilbrey's claims were valid or not, or if weren't in Peters Canyon. Matthew's first post was in regards to Estee Conatser book " The Sterling legend ". The OP was who mentioned first about this book so nothing wrong with Matthew's comment.
I believe after 31/12/1983, many documents about mining claims in the Superstitions were destroyed and erased from archives, just because there was a wilderness area and wouldn't be useful such documents.

 

[Clay Diggins]

I believe after 31/12/1983, many documents about mining claims in the Superstitions were destroyed and erased from archives, just because there was a wilderness area and wouldn't be useful such documents.

Your belief is in error. All this claim case information, just like every other CLOSED mining claim case file, was sent to the National Archives (NARA).

If you read the BLM case serial register page I linked to in my previous post you will see that the entire case file was archived in the National Archives on December 24th 1997. All land tenure cases are archived with the National Archives by law. No records have ever been destroyed for any reason ever.

If you don't wish to view the BLM case record I provided I've extracted the archive entries for you. These references will allow you to retrieve the actual documents from the National Archives.

12/24/1997 163 CASE SENT TO NARA ACCEPTED LOS/049-98-0011;
12/24/1997 164 FRC RETRIEVAL NUMBERS ACCEPTED 1-3/BT002131;

The National Archives are a great resource. Consider adding them to your research tools.

Educate yourself and prosper!

 

[markmar]

Your belief is in error. All this claim case information, just like every other CLOSED mining claim case file, was sent to the National Archives (NARA).

And how do you know were sent to the NARA, you have been there?

 

[Clay Diggins]

And how do you know were sent to the NARA, you have been there?

Yes I have been there more than once.
I use the archives for some of my land status research and have since before there was an internet.
I also receive daily updates from them of new Federal Register entries.
NARA is real. They really do have all the government records archived. These are the actual paper documents - not just an entry in a computer somewhere.

 

[ancientones]

Greetings everyone,

Quick introduction: my name is LD Whitney and I'm an author of fictional adventure thrillers. I'm researching for a novel that combines some of my favorite Arizona Legends about the Jesuits and the Lost Dutchman Mine.

While reading "the Sterling Legend" the author mentions on page 32 that Peter's Canyon fits a number of Dutchman Clues but not all (because none do). I see a lot of focus on Weever's Needle, La Barge Canyon, and so on, but why not Peter's?

I'm currently trying to work out some kind of clue that would lead my main characters to Peter's Canyon above the other well tread options.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

Greetings everyone,

Quick introduction: my name is LD Whitney and I'm an author of fictional adventure thrillers. I'm researching for a novel that combines some of my favorite Arizona Legends about the Jesuits and the Lost Dutchman Mine.

While reading "the Sterling Legend" the author mentions on page 32 that Peter's Canyon fits a number of Dutchman Clues but not all (because none do). I see a lot of focus on Weever's Needle, La Barge Canyon, and so on, but why not Peter's?

I'm currently trying to work out some kind of clue that would lead my main characters to Peter's Canyon above the other well tread options.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

Greetings everyone,

Quick introduction: my name is LD Whitney and I'm an author of fictional adventure thrillers. I'm researching for a novel that combines some of my favorite Arizona Legends about the Jesuits and the Lost Dutchman Mine.

While reading "the Sterling Legend" the author mentions on page 32 that Peter's Canyon fits a number of Dutchman Clues but not all (because none do). I see a lot of focus on Weever's Needle, La Barge Canyon, and so on, but why not Peter's?

I'm currently trying to work out some kind of clue that would lead my main characters to Peter's Canyon above the other well tread options.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

Greetings LDWhitney,
Until his mine location can be found and 'verified', his clues may or may not be true. Those searching for his mine are searching in locations based on 2 of his clues, a South to North flowing canyon(Boulder/Needles/LaBarge), and you could see Weavers Needle due South. You are correct, 'why' not Peters Canyon as this 'fits' these 2 clues. Another clue of his advises his mine is within a 5 mi circle, with Weavers Needle at its center. What if the characters 'heard' it wrong or the provider of the clue purposely 'changed' a part of it and they went 5 miles due
North of Weavers Needle?
Fact or fiction, you have a Great storyline you are pursuing.