Here’s a tail for Anzac Day (25th April). Some readers might be familiar with the 2014 film, The Water Diviner, directed by and starring Russell Crowe, set in Gallipoli in World War 1. Although this was a fictional account, there does exist a true account of the work of an actual water diviner, named Stephen Kelley. An account of his story was first published in 1916 in The British-Australasian newspaper, and then reprinted in the BSD journal in 1951. The account speaks for itself, but it is perhaps indicative of the interest in dowsing by the British military, an interest that goes back further than WW1, but is based on the fact that, when practiced by a good diviner, dowsing delivers.

The article is “Water. A true tale of Suvla Bay”:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No74_1951_p105.pdf

Another common use of dowsing is its use for medical diagnose and treatment. Within the journal of the British Society of Dowsers, is an article by Philip Rogers, which is a reprint of a lecture he gave to the International Veterinary Acupuncture Society in 1982. In this he gives a helpful and comprehensive summary of the principle methods of psychic diagnosis and healing. Although his talk was delivered before vets, the methods apply to both humans and animals. There is much written about healing within the dowsing literature and this article is reproduced here, to help serve as an introduction to the subject.

He begins with a description of some dowsing devices. Apart from the Y rod and the pendulum, which we have met in previous posts, “angle irons”, which are L shared rods. There is the mention of the “the rubbing pad”. Here the dowser rubs their finger(s) over a rubber pad, and the amount of resistance they feel, is a measure of the correctness of the answer sought. (Incidentally, in a manner similar to use of a pad, some dowsers practice a form of device-less search, in which they rub together their thumb and index-finger). The rubbing pad is a method favoured in some dowsing-based diagnostic instruments used in radionics. (Basically, radionics is diagnosis and healing using a specialised instrument that “broadcasts” some form of radiation to the patient). Dowsing devices though at not always necessary, as with practice, device-less dowsing, involving “involuntary muscle twitches” (blink dowsing), can be used. Or the practitioner can just “know” when they find something.

The practitioner can use such instruments, or otherwise, to divine the diagnosis, either in the presence of the patient, or remotely perhaps with the help of a photograph, or diagram, by systematically asking questions and waiting for answers. Interestingly, the range of possible diagnoses is much broader, using divining, than it would be using conventional methods. But at the same time, if care is not taken to become “detached” from the situation, diagnosis can be influenced by any preconceived ideas held by the practitioner. 

Mr Rogers specialised in acupuncture and he gives a couple of examples applying his methodology to animals. In one, he mentions the effect caused by when underground streams cross. Many dowsers report that the health of living things, that spend too much time above such the crossing points, can be seriously affected.  Much is written in the dowsing literature about this effect and how it can be remedied. Mr Rogers states that driving an iron bar into the ground directly over a steam, while upstream of the crossing point, can remove the effect. (Although used in the search for water, this is reminiscent of a similar technique to cancel stream effects, in the post of 6th April 2020 – “A different technique for water divining”). We will come back to the effect of underground steams in future posts.

He makes some interesting observations on acupuncture points and diagnosis through taking the patient’s pulse. In summary he seems to suggest that both are fundamentally mental exercises akin to dowsing reactions. Therefore, a good practitioner is one who has worked out their one technique, which they can believe in and therefore use with confidence. For instance, he uses a kind of remote viewing diagnostic technique.  His comment that the manner in which children “see”, contrasts with that of adults, is particularly pertinent. It suggests that we construct differing realities dependent on our mentalities, and it is that constructed reality which is what we really perceive.

He concludes with a review of common forms of healing practice. Homeopathy is perhaps the most recognisable, and is often used together with dowsing, the dowsing reaction is used to infer the most compatible remedy and its dose for the patient in question. Laying on of hands is perhaps what most people might think of when considering healers at work. But this proximity often seems unnecessary, as healing can be achieved remotely, with or without any kind of sample to represent the patient. What perhaps characterises all of these practices, seems to be the belief of the practitioner that they can help, and therefore have the intention to heal, often using some visualisation technique, either mental, or symbolic. Also, many healers refer to an exchange of some healing “energy”, citing results of Kirlian photography. Or in the case of radionics, the radionics device can both diagnose illness, and then “broadcast healing waveforms” (energy). Though this method is often derided, because the device often has no working electrical component. However, this is to miss the point, since it appears to be acting as a mental prop or sample to the practitioner who, as in all these methods, is healing with their mind. Finally, he seems to suggest, that the ability to diagnose and heal, is more of an innate skill, only be available to a minority (though being wary of aware of “charlatans”).  Therefore, it remains difficult for many most people to accept. But in the end, the efficacy of their work, depends on confirmation by more mainstream methods

The article, entitled “Psychic methods of diagnosis and treatment and acupuncture and homeopathy” is here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No196_1982_p262.pdf

There are plenty of dowsing failures. Even dowsers of long standing will sometimes not get the results that they expect. Some people take up dowsing immediately, perhaps after watching a dowser at work, who then encourages them to “have a go”.  But for others it can be harder. The consensus amongst dowsers, seems to be that the vast majority of people can dowse if they put their mind to it, which means they have to learn and practice, but that a significant minority, (sometimes put at around 10% of people) simply cannot dowse at all.

The following article is a letter written to the BSD by a particularly frustrated beginner, named Mr Gunning. He had obviously read several books on dowsing and had purchased some devices. The books must have suggested that he start with some simple search exercises, referred to as “parlour tricks”. However, he was not achieving any success and he expressed his evident frustration in his letter, see:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No199_1983_p44.pdf

The letter provoked many written replies from members of the Society, and these were published on the following issue of the journal:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No200_1983_p82.pdf

One cannot help thinking that some of the replies were quite patronising. Furthermore, the language used was sometimes incomprehensible and unhelpful to non-dowsers. For example, what are interrupters and there was mention of “evil spirits”!  However, there are several points which the writers stress as being important to the practice of dowsing and therefore worthy of note: being suitably relaxed; having a real need to know the answer; beware of being too over-confident; maintain humility; find something of personal interest to dowse for; and then practice. Some respondents suggested that, the ability to dowse with any degree of success, might only come after six months or more of trying. Sadly, Mr Gunning was obviously offended by many of the replies and presumably never attempted to dowse again.

Finally, the story is worth reflecting upon when one considers many of the experiments which have been conducted to “prove” whether dowsing actually works. In particular, whether the subjects of such experiments are seasoned dowsers, or perhaps more likely, college students simply handed a dowsing device.  Then how is such an experiment is conducted, is the procedure artificial, or more akin to a real-World situation? And we have not even mentioned the attitudes and abilities of the experimenter in charge.  

We normally associate dowsers with forked twigs, pendulum, or other dowsing devices. However, these are not strictly necessary. Device-lass dowsing is quite popular. One of the modern pioneers of this was the late Dan Wilson. He popularised the idea of “blink dowsing”, in which the involuntary blinking of the dowser’s eyes is associated with the dowsing response. Incidentally, many dowsers have reported unusual physiological effects when walking over subterranean water, or mineral deposits. Mr Wilson was not the first to blink dowse. It is said that the practice was first recorded by a clergyman in the eighteenth century, who found that he blinked spontaneously over subterranean water.

The article is a short letter that Mr Wilson sent to the British Society of Dowsers. See “Letters to the Editor” ….

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No191_1981_p41.pdf

He wrote the letter in response to an earlier BSD article, claiming that dowsing tools were unnecessary, but that some effort was required to dowse in this “device-less” manner.

Mr Wilson tells of how the new method did not work for him, if he consciously ran through the possible answers to the dowsing question in his mind, until his eyes blinked at the correct answer. Instead he used his hand to indicate possible answers. He doesn’t elaborate on this, perhaps he ran his hand over a predefined list of ailments? But interestingly the magnitude of the blink was related to the truthfulness of the answer. He was a very gifted individual and developed the ability relatively quickly and thus demonstrated that the need for tools is unnecessary.

He often used his dowsing ability to diagnose and treat medical issue. The latter part of the letter discusses ideas about how mentally activated healing might work. But we can leave that for a later post.

This post is a departure from the usual posts, looking at the applications of dowsing. Many dowsers have offered up their speculations, about how dowsing works. Although these are sometimes proposed with considerable authority, when one looks back at these explanations over the years, one cannot help coming to the conclusion that dowsers should probably just stick to their dowsing. Certainly, the lack of a comprehensive theory underpinning, not just dowsing, but psi-related activities in general, is a problem for those who wish to convince die hard materialists of the efficacy of these activities. The approach I am taking in this blog, is simply to recount the myriad ways in which dowsing is and has been applied. Interested readers may take away from this what they will.

However, of the accounts I have read, there is one that stands out. This was written by a dowser named Alasdair Beal. After eliminating common explanations, he makes the novel conclusion that dowsing is “the art of foretelling possible futures”. This is done through the search question(s) which the dowser poses, and the dowser duly gets a result, even if they never receive any feedback.

Although he does not elaborate further on the idea, one might consider that each possible future is then feeding information back to the dowser working at an earlier time, about how things turned out. Of cause there’s the thorny issue of causality, but that our understanding of that seems to be rather a mess anyway.  If one considers, from physics, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and from parapsychology, the retro-causal experiments of Helmut Schmidt, for instance, maybe Mr Beal has an interesting point to make.

Anyway, the article, entitled “A theory of dowsing”, is here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No225_1989_p504.pdf

This article by Enid Smithett is another from the same BSD journal of the mid-1970s, as that of the Scott-Elliott in the post of 08-04-2020.  It is rather a long article, since it is a transcription of one of her talks, but her dowsing experiences demonstrate some remarkable aspects dowsing. It is easy to miss these on first reading, and so the article is well worth re-reading.

Her speciality is map dowsing, and the description she gives of her work only confirms that dowsing has a mental basis. For her, the map becomes a kind of doorway into a reality, which parallels the physical one in which we exist, but a reality that is amenable to her thoughts and intentions. In this mental reality, she can free herself from things which might otherwise interfere with here dowsing results, and thereby concentrate solely what she is seeking. She stresses that “the dowsing is always correct”, however, she speaks of the difficulty in transposing the results between mental and physical realities. This she says, can lead to mistakes of interpretation, something that also affects other map dowsers.

The list of confounding factors in map dowsing is diverse, involving other people, physical objects and even time.  For example, in the same manner as the rémanence effect we have encountered in earlier posts, she finds that a map can retain information about those who have handled it previously. So, she uses a technique of map tracing to create a “clean” copy of the map, free from such contaminations. And if she personalises the map in some way, for example by writing a date on it, the map becomes a representation of the area covered, at that date, and consequently the subsequent dowsing results also relate to that to subjects existing at that date. As she says, “in dowsing we are separated from time, this is the whole point of it”.

She sees a map as a means of focussing, in the same way that dowsers use samples. When using samples, she is again wary of their contamination. For example, an item of clothing might belong to one person, but be contaminated by the presence of a hair belonging to another.  Another example is a photograph taken from a newspaper, will have text on the rear, from the contents of the following page, and this can have an effect. It seems that the sample is not acting simply as a passive aide-memoir, the actual content of the sample is actively engaging with the dowser’s intention to seek. Therefore for better certainty, she tends to create her own sample by writing down on paper, as much information as she can about the subject sought.

She gives some examples of the results that she has obtained by map dowsing. For example, when dowsing for underground streams, she never detects the reaction bands parallel to the stream, which water diviners often detect while dowsing on the ground. And she can obtain the depth of the stream.  She can trace the movements of people in real-time. And as already mentioned, can dowse back in time.

She recounts an incident that illustrates well the effect of a dowser’s preconceived ideas on their dowsing results. This is where she is engaged in finding underground streams on a property. She detects three streams while map dowsing, but only one when dowsing onsite at the property. The difference came down to how she defined the boundaries of the property. “The dowsing is always correct”, but the interpretation can go very wrong. The solution would seem to be to choose one’s dowsing questions with great care. Furthermore, she stresses the need to take responsibility for what you seek, without referring to others for advice, and to focus attention on what really matters.

About the dowser’s tools and techniques. Some dowsers like herself, set great store by correctly orientating their map. This might be important to some, but probably just depends on any preconceived ideas.  She points out the problem depending too much on the tools, since the tool does not matter, it is better to use our hands. She and other map dowsers can get feelings in the hands when they run over the map, before dowsing proper begins. What is interesting here is that the hands can work in independent ways, each appears to contribute its own information into the dowsing mix.

The article, entitled “Map dowsing”, is here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No156_1972_p15.pdf

Many believe that dowsing is explained as a physiological reaction to some external physical field. This was the view of most dowsers, I would suggest, until perhaps the 1960s, when others started to challenge this assumption, based on their own dowsing experiences. In this 1972 BSD article, by Scott Elliot (former president of the BSD, who we have met previously in post 28/03/2020), dowsing is seen as a purely mental activity. As he puts it, it is based on a mankind’s ability to “know”. This ability is spread widely over the population, with he suggests, up to 90% of the population being able to dowse to a greater or lesser extent.

He talks of the most used technique in dowsing, that of posing a suitable question and dowsing the answer, in the manner of Socratic questioning. And this can be done from anywhere. The problem then is not the dowsing, it is more about asking appropriate questions.

Here he gives some examples of some situations that appear to confirm his assertion. For instance, his particular area of interest was archaeology. And he describes his three-stage approach, with stage 1 being working from home on a map, then conforming these findings in stage 2 by site dowsing, before actually performing a dig. The advantages are that a large area may be covered in a shorter time, than by conventional methods.

He asserts that the dowsing instrument has no particular role as any kind of dowsing detector, that is the detector as such is the dowser themselves and their tool is merely an indicator. To show this, he points out that he often dowses with hands only (this is sometimes referred to as deviceless dowsing), pointing out that for hm, this is effective over maps, or human bodies. However, dowsing tools are helpful, and one might still use different tools for different dowsing approaches, eg pendulum for map work and rod for site work.

He mentions the use of samples. In earlier times, there was an idea amongst dowsers that “like” substances or objects attracted each other in some unknown (but physical) manner, which was essential to successful dowsing. But taking the mental approach, they are seen only as a “mind focuser”, so simply writing down the name of the object sought is enough. Samples can be helpful in some circumstances but really are simply not necessary. They are an example of a “shibboleth” (see also post 06-04-2020), or an idea, which one must follow in order to dowse successfully. There are many of these in the literature. He says however, that one must develop one’s own method that work just for you. (We have seen this idea in previous posts, for example, on water divining). Dowsing is a mental discipline and may take some time to master.

He sums up by saying that all dowsing is “seeking” and so to seek well, one must have a good idea of what is sought, so background knowledge about the subject is invaluable. Good knowledge about a subject can also provide an all to important check on one’s dowsing results, which is important, as preconceived ideas might confound the results. Another aspect of the seeking though is “the need to know”, which in his experience, significantly improves the dowsing ability. The other aspect is one’s own sensitivity and this comes from training the mind to become more receptive, and with practice, the essential confidence in one’s abilities develops

The article, entitled “The Modern Dowser”, is here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No156_1972_p25.pdf

This is a personal account by another water diviner, Clive Beadon, who describes some general features of dowsing and his own technique for locating water. This account written a couple of decades on from the previous posts, incorporates some different features from those earlier methods, presumably incorporating newer ideas.

Like many dowsers, he took up dowsing, after observing a dowser at work and being encouraged to try it himself. He tells an amusing tail of dowsing from an aircraft, as a means of practice (there are a number of instances of this in the British Society of Dowsers’ journal).

He stresses the need to only apply one’s dowsing to particular specific areas. This is because the key to dowsing is the proper interpretation of the dowsing reactions. The dowser is constantly learning, and he found that his dowsing technique was constantly changing. The important factor is one’s “mental attitude”, should be “determination and certainty”, and one should be aware “Shibboleths”, that is attitudes and ways of working which only hamper interpretation. Instead use direct and simple questions, with cross checking where possible.

In the latter part of the article, he talks about his experiences water divining in the drier parts of Portugal.

His method of water divining differs from the previous posts. He starts with a map dowse using a pendulum. He then programs his mind to look for water no deeper than some pre-set depth. To provide some guarantee of a good water supply, he searches for streams crossing each other at different depths. Then for each stream, he deduces its depth and the different strata between it and the surface, since this will affect the ease or otherwise of the drilling. Then the rate of flow and water purity, with reference to trace elements, since customers might require this knowledge. The likely positions must be referenced to the actual geography, as shown on the map, to check for access to the site, and to establish that if a bore hole was sunk, that it does not rob a neighbour of their water supply.

Next, he goes on site with a whalebone dowsing rod (a springy type of rod) and he goes about double checking the results of the map dowsing.  On site he surveys the strata below. He finds the crossing point if the two streams. Separately analysing each stream for depth and flow rate. For depthing he uses a purely mental approach, in which he counts down in feet from the surface until he gets a reaction. For flow rate, he stands over the stream and rotates himself through 360 degrees, until he gets a reaction, each rotation being so many gallons per hour.  He has to correct depth estimates and flow estimates based on his analysis of the strata.

He uses a particularly interesting (and probably individualistic) method to determine whether there are any more flows, flowing into the crossing point. This involves inserting an iron rod over the stream reactions to cancel out the previous reactions. There is a similarity here to the Cryke depthing method described in the last post. It is as if the dowser can program their dowsing reactions through mental intent.

However, there are two confounding issues (dowsing traps) affecting his dowsing and other aspects of the search, a dry aquifer, or “Spook” and a “Shadow” (or imaginary image) of the real stream, or aquifer. But he describes techniques he uses to identify these.

He does not go into much detail about determining the purity of the water, but my guess is that he uses a “Mager colour wheel”, simply a card with a palette of differing colours around the circumference, then using each colour as a sample of the purity of the water, e.g. black might mean brackish water, and light blue might mean drinkable.

All in all, his technique is very thorough to avoid mistakes, which though potentially quite an exhausting process, is one which he found gave its just rewards.

The article is entitled “A splinter of sound”, available here: http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No162_1973_p290.pdf

Following on from the last post which was an introduction to some of the basics of water divining, here is an account from the BSD journal of 1959, from a water diviner named A.C. Wiliamson. This article begins with a helpful description of the geology of underground water. He then describes his own survey technique, again, using a Y rod, very common at that time. He refers to many “dowsing zones” on each side of the underground flow and how these may trick un unwary dowser. He provides a diagram showing two of these zones which give a reaction, two on each side of the stream. This appears to have some similarity to the reactions described by Applegate, but not exactly the same. Also, Williamson does not speak of the “trios”. He then goes on to explain how to distinguish between the various reactions.

For finding the depth of the stream, he mentions the Bishop’s rule in a similar manner to Applegate, but says that when there is a variety of different strata present, and particularly clay, this rule is not reliable. Instead, he uses a method common at the time, devised by a Major Creyke, in which a mumetal rod is inserted directly above the underground stream. Remarkably, this had the effect of creating a number of concentric rings, of different radii, on the surface of the ground, such that when the dowser walked over the ring, they would feel a reaction. The distance of the reaction from the rod, then gave a measure of the depths of the top and bottom of the water bearing strata.

(There is a mention here of someone named Maby. He was a scientist, who had taken it upon himself to investigate the physical principles underlying dowsing. This he did from his dowsing laboratory in the Cotswolds, with some financial support from the BSD.  He was very much a scientist of his day, in that his explanations where based on physical principles, as we see in this article. To begin with he was much admired for his work and he seemed to provide some helpful advice for field dowsing, and he certainly wrote of some interesting experiments in the BSD journal, which we might cover in later posts. But as time progressed, I feel that his work did fall out of favour amongst many members of the BSD.)

For an estimation of the flow rate of water, Williamson uses comparison method, whereby he compares the positions of the first reaction bands he encounters, when walking away from the stream, with those obtained over known flows in a similar geology, ie a kind of lookup table approach. It shows the importance of a knowledge of local geology when water divining.

About water quality, he mentions that some dowsers can deduce it, but he remains sceptical.

He concludes by mentioning how secretive, or vague, water diviners can be about their practice. But even if they divulged all, it is apparent that many differences would exist between their different methods, even though they might all converge on the same result. This is a particularly intriguing aspect of dowsing, I think.

The article “Dowsing in East Africa” is here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No104_1959_p67.pdf

When one mentions dowsing to the uninitiated, there might be blank looks, until you explain that water divining is one application of the art. Most folk seem to be aware of this mysterious ability to locate underground water, often with little more than a forked twig. This is what dowsing is to many people. However ironically, I would suggest, not to the majority of modern-day dowsers. In the UK, although there are many folk who practice dowsing, very few indeed are professional water diviners.

But what most people do not realise is the process a dowser goes through to perform the search. Here I wanted to post a description of a method used by a successful water diviner, named George Applegate, who during his life, was very well-known within the dowsing fraternity. He explained his methodology in his book:

The Complete Guide to Dowsing. The Definitive Guide to Finding Underground Water. Published in 2002 by Vega, London. ISBN 1-84333-115-2.

Here I have taken an extract from the book, simply to illustrate some of the fundamentals of water divining. I have also added some additional notes here.

When dowsing for water, in addition to locating where a subterranean “stream” might reside, such that a borehole might be successfully sunk, there are several pieces of information that need to be established. These include the depth of the water, the flow rate of water, ie the volume that one might expect to obtain in a given amount of time, the direction of flow and the purity of the water, ie is it OK to drink? So quite a lot of information to extract.

The article here deals with actually locating the stream. Remember that this is one dowser’s personal overview, and that another dowser may have another technique, but the I think that it describes some of the salient points.

Applegate seemed to be a dowser who worked mainly with the “rod”, ie the traditional forked stick. (There is a picture of him holding one such at the article). Therefore, the article refers to use of the Y rod when locating water. However, as he points out, other dowsing devices can be used, each producing a reaction based on its design. Perhaps a more common one now-days are angle rods. With these, the dipping action of a Y rod, would be replaced by a rotation of the rods, either inwards so that they cross, or even outwards, so that the rods point in opposite directions.

He starts with what he terms “distant dowsing”. Here he asks in what direction a suitable source of water lies. His basic method is to turn through 360 degrees, rather like a “radar”, as he puts it, hoping to get a reaction in the rod during this circuit. He then walks in the direction of the reaction. Note he could also have done this on a map of the site, but he seemed to prefer being onsite.

The very interesting fact about subterranean water is that it not only creates a reaction in the dowser, when they stand immediately above it, but also at several  other points,  on each side of the underground stream. These are the “reaction bands” which he talks about. Unless a dowser is aware of their existence, they will most likely be misled and think they have found water, but in totally the wrong place!

So as the dowser walks towards the stream, they will feel a number of reactions in their dowsing device, with the strongest of these being over the stream itself. They might mark each of these reactions. It is then important to repeat the process from the other side of the stream, as a confirmation of the first pass.

When above the stream, he uses the rotation method again, this time though only through 180 degrees, searching for “two fan-wise reactions”, ie two reactions which are separated by approximately 180, indicating the line of the stream.

There is the interesting phenomenon of “trios”. So, the reaction over the stream band itself is made up of three reactions, with the central one indicating the centre of the stream. Then as one moves away from the stream, another trio of reactions occurs, which are sometimes referred to as the “depthing” or “flow” bands. The central reaction of these three is particularly helpful, since it may be used to estimate the depth of the flow, using a method known as the Bishop’s rule. (Incidentally, the origin of this rule and its name remain unknown, but it was known of in the late 18^th century. However even in the mid-20^th century, many water diviners did not use this method, but instead used methods of their own devising. I will cover some of these methods in later posts).

It is important that the dowser identifies the centre of the stream very accurately, so that when a bore hole is sunk, it does not miss the flow. And of course, a good estimate of the depth is necessary to understand how deep to drill and whether this is actually cost effective. Estimating the depth can be a very tricky business, and what is not stressed in the extract, is that a successful water diviner will also often draw on their knowledge of local geology.  Also, the scenario described is a simplified one. In practice there may be many confounding issues, for example when more than one steam close together, and for many dowsers, if clay is present between the water and the surface, this can prove a big problem for depth estimation.

Finally, how dowsers discover the remaining information, such as quantity and quality of the underground water, I will deal with in later posts.

The article is found here:  

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/complete_guide_to_dowsing_p142.pdf

To further illustrate the work of a water diviner in action, I have also included another extract from the 1937 Journal of the British Society of Dowsers (BSD). This is the account of a lecture given by a Major K.W. Merrylees, a water diviner working in India.

There are some differences between his and George Applegate’s accounts. He also uses the three sets of “trios” to locate the underground stream and to estimate its depth, but he has developed his own method of distinguishing which trio overlies the stream itself. Merrylees notes that the reaction of his rod is different from that of his dowser colleague. Finally, He doesn’t trust wholly the Bishop’s rule, based on the outer trios, and allows some margin for his depth estimation.

The article is found here, it is entitled “Water divining on the north west frontier”

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No15_1937_p306.pdf