The herald., 1897-04-04

Here was something quite different
| from the location OF tunnels. pipes, and
| other water sources underground that
knew were there. So far had never
/ dared advise anyone to dig, tunnel or
bore on the strength Of the rod. and had
no way of verifying it's indications, not
even daring to spend money on 1t In
works in which was myself interest
| ed and constructing.
In the evening my guide said: Get
the stick and come out here. Now follow
me and see If you find anything"
We went about 200 yards, when the
stick turned strongly over. He lit a
match and / found we were in an old
cattle trail on the fiat below the hill
at the outlet Of little gulch leading
up into the water territory. He pointed
to cross on the ground made in the
dry dirt of the trail with a stick
That's mark Crandall made there
the other night coming home," he said
He says there Is strong flow there"
This was very singular, but still did
not dare advise anyone to invest money
on the strength of the rod, and conse-
quently had no opportunity to confirm
indications where there was no surface
flow. as there was in the case of the
springs above mentioned.
Some time after this latter case 7 went
over another proposition to develop un-
foreground water. The owner told me
DR.. Crandall had been over 1t the week
before. / told him not to tell me where
his marks were. but to let me alone
With piece of live oak twig l located
within three feet nine of the marks made
by DR.. Crandall with a whalebone and
wires and chemical bulbs, and came
within ten feet OF as many more I did
not miss any that tried to find, nor did
l locate any water where he had failed,
nor fail where he had succeeded
nave tried many more experiments,
perhaps more than any other skeptic
has ever tried, and have come to the fol-
lowing conclusions, which I believe will
be reached by any one who can muster
courage enough to say he Is not ashamed
to believe anything simply because he
doesn't understand 1t or because II is not
respectable to believe it:
First-That the rod in the hands of
about five people out of ten will indicate
flowing water somewhere below ground
Second-Thatit 1t will also oindGcate either
something else, or water at depth so
great as to be unavailable at ordinary
cost.
ThirdIThat great care is necessary
with long experience, in its use to keep
from being deceived by it.
I have come to the following practical
conclusions. which in the present state
of our knowledge on the subject. do not
believe can be safely overstepped:
First-If the question were, Shall I
dig. bore or tunnel at all? should say
most decidedly I want some indications
beside those of the rod; want to know
where the water is coming from, wheth-
er there Is sufficient watershed and rain
fall somewhere back OF X TO account for
a stream underground. Where these are
lacking I should not advise spending
money. no matter what the rod showed. .
I should leave the responsibility of that
to the owner.
Secon6-If other conditions are so
favorable that 1t is decided to try for
water on a certain piece of ground, then
I should follow the indications of the
rod in locating the places for the wells
or tunnels or cross-cuts. This is exactly
what was done by the engineer of the
Riverside works. He was satisfied the
water was there first, because every
thing indicated an artesian belt. Other
artesian belts and wells flowing for
many years were all around him, and
but a few miles back were immense
mountains with a great rainfall and
snowfall. and this belt was right in the
course OF one of the old channels to the
sea. But a dozen wells may be bored
flows of water. He therefore used the
rod to determine where the strongest
flows were. Whether the rod deter
mined this or not the fact is he got one
of the finest groups of flowing wells of
permanent water TO be found In any
country. T. S. VAN DYKE.