YOUR FAVORITE CLUE/EVIDENCE

[somehiker]

somehiker,
The ridgeline you speak of . . . North end of Black Top Mesa . . . just before it drops down into Needle Canyon to the North. . .

Nope.....although many DH'ers have spent their days searching, blasting and digging Black Top, based on the same conclusion.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Idahodutch]

Some Hiker has Freed me.

Nope.....although many DH'ers have spent their days searching, blasting and digging Black Top, based on the same conclusion.

Somehiker,
Believe it or not, I'm really glad you answered
That is great news. I no longer feel like this MUST be the LDM site. It has been lowered just a tad to "Looks good, and maybe". I don't know if your site has anything else to go with it, and don't want to know.


I only knew of one other place where 4-peaks as one, but nothing else to go with it. So I no longer feel like "Come on! someone has gotta go look." LOL
Seriously, I was really having a hard time.

Sincerely,
Idaho Dutch

 

[Idahodutch]

Somehiker,
Believe it or not, I'm really glad you answered
That is great news. I no longer feel like this MUST be the LDM site. It has been lowered just a tad to "Looks good, and maybe". I don't know if your site has anything else to go with it, and don't want to know.


I only knew of one other place where 4-peaks as one, but nothing else to go with it. So I no longer feel like "Come on! someone has gotta go look." LOL
Seriously, I was really having a hard time.

Sincerely,
Idaho Dutch

Well, a little over a week has gone by, and have been experiencing a sense of "Being at ease". A calmness about this that I haven't felt before.
Just so there is no misunderstanding, I believe now more than ever that this raving is the home of the LDM. I just no longer feel the need to see the mine unearthed and absolute verification by means of ore sampling.
I also believe that there are probably MANY rich deposits and in places outcroppings of great significance in the near proximity. I was always interested in seeing if I could find the elusive LDM, and am satisfied with the results of the hunt.

Would I like to see or hear more? Of course I would, I'm still here. I think I am just enjoying it more than before. It is after all, supposed to be some healthy stimulating downtime activity, not change our personality.

Thanks for the gift,
Idaho Dutch

 

[Idahodutch]

There is a place along a ridge line where both can be seen, with FP to the north and WN to the south, but not with either in their entirety.
The four peaks did not also have individual names in those days, so Waltz couldn't have named what he could see as anything else.
Or even the mountain he was on at the time.

somehiker,
I was just looking at stuff and then decided to see if I could find your place along a ridge. Would you tell me if I guess right? or would you prefer I pm you my guess?
Idahodutch

 

[somehiker]

PM it......I'll let you know.......SH.

Don't want any of them "russian trolls" over here, claiming they found "IT" with their cell phone GE app.

 

[Idahodutch]

PM it......I'll let you know.......SH.

Don't want any of them "russian trolls" over here, claiming they found "IT" with their cell phone GE app.

Somehiker,
Here is a poor drawing of what the view (looks like) I'm talking about... I think it shows what I am trying to describe better than I can describe. (. . . maybe not)


Edit - the lower portion of 4-Peaks that is in the brown part, is not in view, but is obscured by Malapais Mountain, and what remains in view is what looks like one peak. When looking for 4-Peaks as 1, this is the view I look for.
There are a few places in there , that I know of, that this is the view. I am not sure what view you mean for your view. If you are allowed to see the base, then there are more places that can fit that because you don't need anything to just partially block the view.

Your View? (sorry, pun intended)

Idahodutch

 

[Idahodutch]

Somehiker,
Here is a poor drawing of what the view (looks like) I'm talking about... I think it shows what I am trying to describe better than I can describe. (. . . maybe not)

View attachment 1808004
Edit - the lower portion of 4-Peaks that is in the brown part, is not in view, but is obscured by Malapais Mountain, and what remains in view is what looks like one peak. When looking for 4-Peaks as 1, this is the view I look for.
There are a few places in there , that I know of, that this is the view. I am not sure what view you mean for your view. If you are allowed to see the base, then there are more places that can fit that because you don't need anything to just partially block the view.

Your View? (sorry, pun intended)

Idahodutch

Somehiker,
The clue, where up on the low ridge, above his mine to the north, the Four Peaks are lined up to look like one peak.
(That is not the quote, but for this illustration, I think it will suffice.)

The words "lined up" does not automatically mean in some sort of row. It also means "correctly placed". (edit: or "Properly Placed", "Rightly Placed")
Try reading it that way a couple of times and think about the placement on the horizon.

Idaho Dutch

 

[Idahodutch]

Since they don't actually line up in a straight row, as in not possible, perhaps the meaning of this clue was just a little bit tricky, but not false.

Edit: Say you show up to an event where there are over 200 folks present, and you are the guy in charge. It's time to start and you need everybody to line up.

Are you going to tell everybody to line up and then just wait. or would also give them additional information for proper placement, such as "In single file" or "In squad formation" or "So it looks like there is only one of you"
It is very easy to infer additional information that was not given, without realizing it; such as "in a row" or "In a straight line".

Many dutch hunters seem to infer the part "in a row" when that is not what the clue says. It just says lined up and then says how . . . . to look like one peak.

 

[Idahodutch]

Here is a GE image showing the view of Four Peaks as 1-Peak from the low ridge above the ravine.



It is small, but it is there and it looks like 1-peak
Idahodutch

 

[Idahodutch]

I was reading an older thread (from 2015) called "Brownie Holmes Manuscript", by Matthew Roberts. It is page 7 of the LDM Forum, Post #8
I don't want to bump a 5 year old thread, so am posting a copy of here. In the next couple of posts, I would like to go through what I believe my be the general path from Matthew's post below.

markmar,

Here are the directions Waltz gave to Dick Holmes and Gideon Roberts, word for word, no additions, no deletions:

"Go to first water, then to second water, then take the old government trail to San Carlos. Where the trail turns south you will see over the point of a ridge a rock standing in the brush that looks like a man. This is where I always leave the trail. Go to the left of the trail and follow up the long ridge and you will come to a saddle. In this saddle is a round Indian ruin of rocks. Go through this saddle and on up a low ridge and when you get to the highest point of the ridge you can look north and the four peaks are lined up to look like one peak. In the other direction you will see a high needle. In the canyon under you is my hidden camp. You can't get down there because it's too steep, go to the mouth of the canyon and then back. You can find the rock house with very little difficulty. You won't be able to see it until you are right upon it. After you find the camp then come back out of the canyon. (Here Waltz gave a direction to the mine that Holmes and Roberts kept secret). You will never be able to find the mine until you first find the rock house as the shaft is completely hidden. A prospector won't find it because there is no ledge in view. In the mine you will find about $75,000 dollars in gold already dug out. There is enough gold left to dig to make twenty men millionaires." I dug the outcropping away and erased all signs of my digging."

Anything else you may have heard came from someone else. This is Holmes account of what Waltz told him, nothing more, nothing less. Holmes and Roberts kept one part of Waltz's direction secret, this is an important part of the location of the mine.

Personally I see only one error that could have been made by Waltz giving the directions to his hidden camp. Clay has noticed this also. Where Waltz says ...... "go to the mouth of the canyon and then back."

This is confusing because Waltz already has Holmes and Roberts on the highest point of the ridge. It seems he should have said , go to the head of the canyon. That would make more sense because the mouth would indicate the canyon with his rock house was even higher than the point of the ridge you are standing on. I think Waltz understandably mixed head and mouth of the canyon. That is an easy thing for people to do, say one when they mean the other, especially if Waltz was beginning to fail.

Matthew

 

[Idahodutch]

A major consideration that should be taken into account, is that the best LDM Hunters know what the general area should be for these directions, but cannot plot out all of the directions as written, or it would have been found.
If Holmes and Roberts didn't happen to have paper and pencil ready, then maybe this is all by memory. Even with paper and pencil, if Waltz was giving dying statement, you do the best you can and hopefully not too much gets missed.

I think we will get closer than anticipated, but well see.

There was a lot of discussion as to what Waltz would have been calling "First Water" and "Second Water". If they are not the ones we know today, then we can glean some indication where they might be from the directions from the Manuscript above.
> You have to end up heading down the old San Carlos trail, and you will have passed both 1st and 2nd waters before the San Carlos Trail heads South.
> Sometime after the S.C. Trail heads South, is the rock in the brush that looks like a man.
> At this point you will veer to the left from the trail up a long ridge and you will come to a saddle.
> From that saddle (Indian ruins probably gone) go on up a low ridge, and at the highest point, look to the north and see Four Peaks looking like one peak.

Since this is from Waltz to Holmes, then the First water would maybe be coming in from Hidden Springs (the one that is covered up now) then south up Boulder Canyon, until you get to a spring that dumps right into Boulder Canyon ..oh yeah, that one I think is called 2nd Water.
Now I need to put together some diagrams (they will be labeled as well).

I am not hung up either 1st or 2nd waters, as they are not end of the rainbow, rather just things you pass along the way. These seem likely to me is all.

 

[Idahodutch]

The Viewing Scope

Here is a GE image of the Core Area.
> Canyons are marked up Blue
> Water Features Clouded Green
> Red Hills Clouded Red
> The 2 sights of a riffle so to speak for viewing the rock man marked light Orange w/Red Arrows.



If you guys are not able to find the Rock Man Standing in the Brush using the Rifle scope, Let me know, and I will gladly post the solution for this.
There must have a little bit more info that we did not get in the directions from the manuscript here. You'll see what I mean. Even this Scope viewing thing is kind of tricky.
Who said Waltz wasn't Tricky?

Ah, One more thing, The rock man is not in this view. You have to use the scope. I showed you the placements. The rest is there, even on GE.
Happy Saturday Morning
Idaho Dutch

PS - you're on the canyon floor walking in, as you come into the viewing area, you look OVER the point of a ridge . . . to see the rock man. I don't think he is small like us.

 

[Idahodutch]

So once we know where, then we can go to the left of the trail and follow up the long ridge and we will come to a saddle.



Well we have come to the end of the long ridge. . . it says we WILL come to a saddle.
If we look around, straight across Needle canyon, it looks like we do have a saddle.



Maybe these directions actually can be plotted. We'll see how far we can go.
Idaho Dutch

 

[Idahodutch]

So the next part of the directions go like this:
In this saddle is a round Indian ruin of rocks. Go through this saddle and on up a low ridge and when you get to the highest point of the ridge you can look north and the four peaks are lined up to look like one peak.



Well, if there was an Indian ruin of rocks on that saddle, it doesn't look like we can see any, but that pile of rocks is odd.
However, we do have a low ridge just beyond the saddle, and a high point, just like the directions.



Well it looks like we do have the Four Peaks in view to the north from this spot, and only one peak is visible.
It's small, but it is there.

Idaho Dutch

 

[Idahodutch]

Wouldn't it be nice if we could really hike through the mountains this fast to get where we wanted to be?
Sorry, was just thinking how nice it would be.

I am going to take a break for a bit.
I'll be back though, we got to finish this journey.
The next leg is where we get into a minor hickup with directions that we touched on earlier.
We'll see, I'm wondering how close we are going to get.
Maybe we should think about this, because we might just end up face to face with the reality of what to do next. Everybody is going to start watching what everybody else is doing, waiting to see what kind of move someone going to make. I ask the question, because these directions are turning out to be not that bad. If two completely sets of directions take us to the same ravine, and we are not supposed to dig. Something to think about.

 

[Idahodutch]

Here is a GE image of the Core Area.
> Canyons are marked up Blue
> Water Features Clouded Green
> Red Hills Clouded Red
> The 2 sights of a riffle so to speak for viewing the rock man marked light Orange w/Red Arrows.

View attachment 1808861

If you guys are not able to find the Rock Man Standing in the Brush using the Rifle scope, Let me know, and I will gladly post the solution for this.
There must have a little bit more info that we did not get in the directions from the manuscript here. You'll see what I mean. Even this Scope viewing thing is kind of tricky.
Who said Waltz wasn't Tricky?

Ah, One more thing, The rock man is not in this view. You have to use the scope. I showed you the placements. The rest is there, even on GE.
Happy Saturday Morning
Idaho Dutch

PS - you're on the canyon floor walking in, as you come into the viewing area, you look OVER the point of a ridge . . . to see the rock man. I don't think he is small like us.

Well no one has said they were able to find it so far. Remember, this is just a landmark that Waltz could see easily, that he was right on track still.
Here is the only Rock man I could find behind the point of any ridge while traveling up Boulder canyon at ground level, and according to the location spelled out in the directions.

See what you think . .


Idaho Dutch
Edit: Waltz never said he was standing up straight, just standing in the brush. Maybe that's just how many of the old miners stood, after years of mining?
I don't want to restrict things by adding any inferring on my part.

Edit: I just noticed I posted the wrong Rock Man image. This one, I had highlighted a thin line around the clothes he is wearing, for my own viewing. I guess I'll just leave it be.
Sorry about that. Not trying to pull one over on anyone.
Idahodutch

 

[Idahodutch]

Well no one has said they were able to find it so far. Remember, this is just a landmark that Waltz could see easily, that he was right on track still.
Here is the only Rock man I could find behind the point of any ridge while traveling up Boulder canyon at ground level, and according to the location spelled out in the directions.

See what you think . .
View attachment 1809112

Idaho Dutch
Edit: Waltz never said he was standing up straight, just standing in the brush. Maybe that's just how many of the old miners stood, after years of mining?
I don't want to restrict things by adding any inferring on my part.

Edit: I just noticed I posted the wrong Rock Man image. This one, I had highlighted a thin line around the clothes he is wearing, for my own viewing. I guess I'll just leave it be.
Sorry about that. Not trying to pull one over on anyone.
Idahodutch

After thinking about this for a while, this solve of the directions is based on the Rock Man, and where you leave the trail.
I think it prudent to wait on the remaining parts, until there is some general consensus from the group, that this is probably the Rock Man.

Sincerely,
Idaho Dutch

 

[skyhawk1251]

For some background information about the Holmes Manuscript, see this:

https://www.desertusa.com/mb3/viewtopic.php?t=393

It's my opinion that the Holmes Manuscript is a contrived, fabricated, melodramatic blend of fact and fiction, and I would put the amount of fact at a bit above none. What fact there might be in it is so interwoven with pure hogwash that the entire document has no credibility at all. I can say the same for most tales and "clues" that originated after the Dutchman's death. I accept Bicknell's newspaper articles as being factual only because it's reported that he based those articles on oral testimony from Julia Thomas. I also accept the veracity of Jim Bark's notes, although those notes only cover Bark's explorations for the lost mine. I don't accept all the "clues" attributed to have come directly from the Dutchman as being true. The Dutchman was a no-good murderer, and a liar, in my opinion, so many of those "clues" could be completely bogus. He did his best to cover his tracks when going to and from his mine, so why would he be eager to give "clues" so freely, even if he was sitting in a saloon in a drunken stupor? It doesn't make any sense. The LDM will only be found by accident, and only an ore sample will prove that it has been found. Google Earth can be a useful tool for researching possible sites for on-the-ground explorations, but it will never be able to "find" the LDM. And if the author/authors of any book can't show an ore sample, don't buy that book.

 

[Idahodutch]

Skyhawk,
Thank you for sharing your views.

So it appears we have a nay vote on the rock man
And I will add my vote of yes for the rock man

So far it looks 50/50.

 

[coazon de oro]

For some background information about the Holmes Manuscript, see this:

https://www.desertusa.com/mb3/viewtopic.php?t=393

It's my opinion that the Holmes Manuscript is a contrived, fabricated, melodramatic blend of fact and fiction, and I would put the amount of fact at a bit above none. What fact there might be in it is so interwoven with pure hogwash that the entire document has no credibility at all. I can say the same for most tales and "clues" that originated after the Dutchman's death. I accept Bicknell's newspaper articles as being factual only because it's reported that he based those articles on oral testimony from Julia Thomas. I also accept the veracity of Jim Bark's notes, although those notes only cover Bark's explorations for the lost mine. I don't accept all the "clues" attributed to have come directly from the Dutchman as being true. The Dutchman was a no-good murderer, and a liar, in my opinion, so many of those "clues" could be completely bogus. He did his best to cover his tracks when going to and from his mine, so why would he be eager to give "clues" so freely, even if he was sitting in a saloon in a drunken stupor? It doesn't make any sense. The LDM will only be found by accident, and only an ore sample will prove that it has been found. Google Earth can be a useful tool for researching possible sites for on-the-ground explorations, but it will never be able to "find" the LDM. And if the author/authors of any book can't show an ore sample, don't buy that book.

Howdy Skyhawk,

You are not alone, there are many who dismiss the Holmes Manuscript, along with many of the other clues, the PSM's, the Salazar Survey, and even Google Earth which is a wonderful tool when used properly. Many are in the same boat with you, yes it's a big boat.