That would be according to Fazio vs Tom...Fazio states 50 yards north and south which doesn't go beyond the spoil..

I know but 50 yards was the minimum requirement of the contract ... you yourself questioned this years ago given the large amount of material involved.  50 yards or more ... you thought ? Not trying to put words in your mouth ...

There can't honestly be anyone still around that buys into the dredge theory, can there?

Or, for that matter, that the three packets of twenties just somehow managed to stay intact--rubberbands and all--for years before magically burying themselves after the last high water event in May/June 1974 that occurred two months BEFORE the last dredge.

Oh, and let's not forget about the May/June diatoms, and only the May/June diatoms.

Palmer was wrong. Don't believe me? Look at the damn high altitude photos that clearly show the migration of the August 1974 dredge--it went no where near the money find spot. How could it, after all the last time the river reached the spot was two months BEFORE the dredge.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

My understanding is the dredge layer thins out as it approaches the river, correct? I believe several feet is marked high above the tide line? what kind of power could of done this if it wasn't put there and how did it last so long after the dredging in 1974? the beach constantly erodes.

A very large area can be seen of sand being dug up south of the find..a huge area. it doesn't appear to be consistent with digging a trench east to west. it's hard to calculate since none of the lines drawn are equal but appears to be 80-100 foot wide of disturbed sand. several agents can be seen still digging up the area...

Thats the area oif the comparison trench and McPheters crew's raking site... south of the Ingram find grid.

This is the same area some of the FBI photo's show them digging up the area..I don't see where raking would leave that effect or distrupt as much as it shows..

Yes its well turned up... raking, digging, hoeing ...

And, no confirmed reports of fragments found there either!

McPheters clearly states on page 138 of his book that he found fragments by raking.

No, the point is how the dredge sand got so far up the beach without help..If Palmer is right then someone is not being honest about the movement of the sand..

Palmer was wrong. There is a clay layer visible today at river level, maybe a foot above at times, that is clearly not the clay layer Palmer referenced in his report. Therefore, it appears that there are multiple natural layers of clay on the beach.

The so-called dredge layer Palmer found is probably irrelevant, whatever its true nature is. Because the bundles were found encased in the @upper active layer of sand which is nothing more than the upper layer of the 24" thick Cross Bedded Layer Palmer correctly identified. That cross bedded layer can be seen very clearly in Tom's FBI photos of the Ingram site trench. I posted those photos at DZ years ago. So the Cooper money was near the top of a 24" thick cross bedded layer, a whole two feet above the questionable clay lump dredging layer, socalled.   

Cross bedded layers represent time. They are assembled over time by many successive water events moving and reworking sand, in and out. The fact this layer at the Ingram site is two feet thick suggests to me its lowest extremity probably dates back to 1974 if not earlier. Dating that cross bedded layer may be key to dating the arrival of the Ingram money. The upper 2-8 inches of that layer is the layer the money was extracted from.

It's just too bad strata samples weren't kept for lab work. One piece of lab work was done by the FBI which found 'round sand types between the bills consistent with Columbia river water'. That result is 100% consistent with sands found in a cross bedded sand layer flanking the Columbia River ... versus other sand types one would expect to find in other geological regions and their streams in Washington. (The Washougal, for example)

Im saying the same thing Ive said a hundred times before. I think you can discount Palmer's clay dredging layer - the money was not found in that layer but far above it in the upper part of the cross bedded layer that was eroding away ... how long the money had been in that layer God only knows because we have no lab work to guide us that I can point to.

Fly just posted an article surround the dredging. Palmer didn't identify the layer, the Army corps. did. I seem to recall read that long ago.

Now, is the Army Corps. wrong like Palmer was thought to be. how did so much material get above the tideline?

To illustrate my point from the post above, look at the side-by-side pics from 1968 and 1974 below.

It appears that Tena Bar was flush with replenished sand in June 1974 (two months before the August 1974 dredge and during an historical high-water event) compared to 1968. This seems to indicate that Tena Bar had dredge spoils placed upon it between these two photos, and likely before the skyjacking.