Lake Park is the most prominent theoretical resting place for the Milwaukee Secret casque. It has the most followers, the most variations, the most commentary, and the most coverage, but is it deserving of the intense attention it has received? It appears that a belief in Lake Park, for many, supersedes the desire to uncover a casque since these ideas are not mutually exclusive. Many investigators ignore the reasons why Lake Park is not a viable solution for the Milwaukee case of “The Secret“.
If our true intension is to unearth the Milwaukee casque, then we must critically analyze the available information from proposed solutions, which in most instances includes and requires exposing faults, inconsistencies, deviations from the source material, and flaws of logic, even in regard to our own ideas. But given how many theories exist, Lake Park or otherwise, despite the existence of only one true answer, it seems as though most people are unwilling to do this, which is why after years of research and zero results, Lake Park is still a prominent focus.
Conducting an objective analysis, it becomes apparent that Lake Park does not offer a suitable solution to The Secret, if your goal is finding Byron’s true answer. Regardless of which version you prescribe to, at best, Lake Park is incredibly flawed, contains unverifiable superficial connections, is inconsistent and inaccurate when compared to the source material, uses puzzle devices that essentially serve no purpose, is missing key components unreasonable to ignore, and requires filling missing components with personal ideas. While Lake Park interpretations offer a handful of truly compelling elements, even the most well-formulated variations fail to present a comprehensive collection of authentically incorporated devices. We succeed in making “matches” while failing to “solve” anything.
The intension of this analysis, more than anything, is to stoke the fires of critical thinking and objective observation for a less superficial and circumstantial appreciation of theoretical Secret solutions. We get really excited when a handful of technically accurate connections are made…but is that enough? Unilateral enthusiasm frequently overrules the application of alternative perspectives or opposing evidence. With any proposed Secret solution, especially our own, the very first thing we should be doing is attempt to prove it wrong in the spirit of objective answers. Our priority should be solving the Secret, not proving Lake Park, or any other theoretical solution. Instead of only considering the things that “fit”, we must also consider what doesn’t fit.
Presented objections exist on a varying scale. While some objections are more nit-picky and theoretical, others are far more damaging if no reasonable explanation can be offered. Collectively, this analysis paints a far less definitive picture than the proprietors of conventional musings care to acknowledge.
The goal is not to get you to agree with every point, the goal is to get you to think, challenge, and question. It seems that for a large segment of Secret investigators, the most intolerable act committed by another investigator is asking reasonable questions while expecting an honest answer in return. Responses almost exclusively include avoidance, talking in circles, overt refusals, changing the subject, passive aggressiveness, defensive applications of the word “opinion”, accusations of intellectual superiority, and name calling. How that advances the primary goals of the community remains to be seen. If Lake Park is not a viable solution, then it needs to be exposed as counterfeit so investigative focus and resources can be reallocated to determining an authentic answer.
This analysis references solution characteristics not always explained here in full detail. If you are unfamiliar with what Lake Park proposals typically contend, please see this Lake Park solution explanation on PB works for some applicable information or this one here from “The Secret Explained”.
View the three stories of Mitchell
While the three-story Mitchel building at UWM serves as a technically accurate interpretation of this line, the language utilized is quite curious. In no other instance does Byron use the word “view”. What purpose does it serve to “view” our three stories if we are only meant to be at a building? Could this simply be the product of generic word choice, or could there be undefined meaning behind it.
As you walk the beating of the world
This line is interpreted as Kenwood Ave for its apparent connection to a manufacturer of electric food beaters. What these first two lines fail to accomplish is establishing a precise starting location and direction of travel. We view the 3 stories of Mitchell somewhere along Kenwood…but we don’t know specifically where. We walk the beating of the world…but don’t know the direction. That seems a little problematic, especially when considering that we can find street names of three past Milwaukeeans, fulfilling line four of the verse, going in either direction. Then the question becomes, why do we view the 3 stories of Mitchel while walking the beating of the world? The source language is not rendered authentic with this interpretation.
At a distance in time
From three who lived there
Interpreted as streets named after historical Milwaukeeans, these verse lines serve as a curious entry. If this is the correct interpretation, why use “at a distance in time” at all? This entire line seemingly serves no purpose given the inclusion of the word “lived”, which more concisely alludes to the same condition of past residence.
Downer and Hackett are notable figures while Shepard is not, reportedly named for a local farmer according to onmilwaukee.com. This is in fact the only online source I could find that positively IDs the source of Shepard Ave’s namesake. I know Byron loves obscure references, but would this information be accessible through limited library research in 1981-82? The names of Downer, Stowell, and Farwell, going in the opposite direction, are arguably more notable collectively.
At a distance in space
From woman, with harpsichord
Silently playing
This clue refers to yet another street sign, serving as example five of eight total across the solve. As a resident of Milwaukee, I can confidently confirm an environment of ethically rich neighborhoods and spellbinding historical landmarks despite the otherwise mundane impression this interpretation generates, predominantly populated by street signs, rocks, dirt, trees, vent pipes, and sewer covers. Why would Byron bypass city locations teeming with subjects of interest, to instead focus his efforts on an affluent neighborhood almost completely devoid of these things? That’s not to say he can’t, but these choices are highly suspicious, and a potential indication that Lake Park is not a viable solution.
Another important detail of note is the inclusion of two sets of the words “at” and “from”. Logically, this would most likely be communicating a location we are “at”, then a specific point of reference within that location to leave “from”. In the context of this Lake Park interpretation, what purpose are these words truly serving if all we are doing is going straight down Kenwood past a group of street signs? Could the appearance of these sets of words back-to-back indicate a specific formula by which these lines are intended to be interpreted with?
I have seen several possible interpretations for distance in space, none of which are extremely satisfying although technically viable. Shepard Ave, previously connected to an obscure local farmer as our last of three “who lived there”, is also connected to astronaut Alan Shepard, notable as the first American in space. If this is true, then whether we apply the word at or from, we are still just walking in a straight line from one point to the next. Possible, but unsatisfying for the product of trained communication.
The other common interpretation is simply acknowledging the physical distance between Shepard and Marietta. The issue is, without any context of direction or distance, our “distance in space” is hopelessly open ended and does nothing to guide us on the intended path that randomly searching for the next clue wouldn’t equally accomplish.
Marietta Ave is said to reference Marietta Robusti, an Italian artist responsible for painting a self-portrait in front of a harpsichord. There is certainly a degree of accuracy and intrigue with this inclusion, but not without corresponding questions. While the verse applies the words “silently playing”, Robusti is not playing the harpsichord in her self-portrait, but rather standing in front of it with sheet music in one hand with the other hovering over the keys. It’s interesting that we have three elements across two separate lines indicating one street sign…and we are still just walking straight.
In addition, can we apply any explanation for the sentence structure? A comma separates “from woman” and “with harpsichord”, while silently playing occupies a completely separate line. The separation of “silently playing” suggests an application in addition to the association with the woman, while this interpretation fails to offer one. Are these merely inconsequential structure choices…or does it mean something? If an interpretation could explain ALL of these sentence structure choices and nuances of language, would that aid in authenticating that proposal? I am consistently told, in a variety of ways, that more answers makes a proposed solution less compelling, while simultaneously blaming Byron for “vague” puzzles.
Step on nature
Step on nature is interpreted as entering Lake Park from Lake Drive despite failing to actually step on “nature” as the verse instructs. While some will point out that the footpath we enter Lake Park from is in fact a section of the Oak Leaf Trail, this moniker was not applied until 1996. As a side note, its amazing how many people insist that the Oak Leaf Trail name has existed since the 30’s despite the easily confirmable fact that it hasn’t.
Ascend the 92 steps
After climbing the grand 200
Pass the compass and reach
The infamous “Grand” Staircase of Lake Park in fact has more than 92 steps historically when counting the “approach” stairs that we “ascend” no different than any other stair. Under what basis would we skip counting stairs we ascend in order to approach the primary flight of stairs? This gives us the sum of 97 rather than 92. The verse also never says “stair”, but instead says “step”, which can be many things other than physical stairs. If the staircase is meant to be so “obvious”, why not say stair instead of “step” if it MUST be stairs anyway?
Oddly, “ascend the 92 steps” and “after climbing the grand 200” is reportedly indicative of the same staircase, which poses several potentially incriminating inquiries. Why would Byron use two verse lines to indicate the same staircase when placing the word “after” preceding the word “ascending” while eliminating the “grand 200” entirely would more concisely accomplish the same effect? Do we really require a secondary, arguably less definitive confirmation for such a precise qualifier as 92 steps? Regarding order of instruction, the word “after” creates a condition of uncertainty seemingly without a payoff as any Lake Park interpretation applies those lines in a linear sequence to the same staircase.
Conveniently omitted is the considerable distance traveled from the staircase to the North Point lighthouse, requiring roughly 1400ft of uninstructed advancement through interconnected, meandering pathways, passing a variety of notable structures before reaching the intended destination, exclusively associated to the verse because a compass “points north”. The puzzle also fails to provide any instruction when determining direction of travel after ascending the staircase. This is in contrast to our journey along Kenwood Ave which incorporates nine verse matches in a straight line, traveling a comparable, approximate 1000 ft distance. Why do we need nine devices to travel a straight line down a city street, but we only receive two devices over a 1400ft stretch of meandering, divergent pathways? Something doesn’t seem right. This apparent lack of communication from a trained communicator might suggest that Lake Park is not a viable solution.
While the verse tells us to “pass” the compass, many common interpretations neglect to fulfill this basic requirement. If traveling southwest past the lighthouse across the final bridge and set of lion statues, it would be seemingly impossible to continue the verse, which explains the common strategy of ignoring this instruction. If we take the same unofficial shortcut Josh Gates did toward the ravine trail in Expedition: Unknown to initiate our 100 paces below the bridge, at no point do we pass “the compass”.
One possible resolution to this discrepancy involves traveling west past the lighthouse toward Wahl St., eventually intersecting with the entrance to the North Lighthouse Ravine Trail, which subsequently leads us to the area “below the bridge” and runs congruent with the drainage channel inaccurately classified as a “culvert”. However, this action creates an additional issue. When we pass the compass, we are meant to reach the foot of the culvert. Beginning at the western entry point of the trail positions us at the top of the drainage channel, rather than the bottom or foot. If we automatically walk to the bottom based on the perceived goal of reaching the “foot” of the “culvert”, then instruction from lines 14-16 are rendered arbitrary and redundant.
An alternate school of thought utilizes a masonic compass found on Lake Park light fixtures as the infamous “compass” of verse 8 lore. However, nearly every lamppost in the park carries this insignia, while the verse clearly references a singular compass rather than multiple. If this is a valid interpretation, which “compass” do we apply going in which direction, and how do we know with certainty based on puzzle communication? Ironically, the light post applied to travel north after the staircase does not have the masonic insignia, making it one of the few if not the only lamppost in the park lacking a masonic compass.
The next question is, why does the verse abruptly stop at the word “reach”? Is there a reasonable explanation for that? Does such an odd sentence structure necessitate a specific purpose and payoff behind this decision?
The foot of the culvert
Many interpretations implement one of two open-air drainage channels found beneath a footbridge, flanking either side of the North Point lighthouse, as our “culvert”. In the applicable episode of Expedition: Unknown, Josh Gates even excitedly exclaims “This is literally a culvert”. The problem is, an open-air drainage channel does not meet the dictionary definition of a culvert, alternatively identified as an enclosed, engineered drainage system, and in most cases some variety of tube.
Although the underbelly of a bridge can be considered a “culvert” if engineered by specific guidelines, the bridges at Lake Park do not qualify. In some cases, a culvert is removed to restore a more natural, open-air waterway. This process is called daylighting or deculverting. In this sense, the drainage channels at Lake Park commonly associated with verse 8 constitute the opposite of a culvert. If an accurate alternative is not identifiable, then Lake Park is not a viable solution.
If considering the presence of a “culvert” on the South Lighthouse Ravine Trail, there is not an obvious example, although access is currently limited (as of 6/16/25) due to a collapsed bridge. The North Lighthouse Ravine Trail alternatively offers 3 distinct although questionable possibilities. There is first the presence of a corrugated drainage tube, although the diameter is well below a typical “culvert”, and it’s existence since 1982 is questionable. There are multiple stone bridges that arguably comply with the loose technical standards of a “culvert bridge”, but then the question would be why is there more than one when the verse specifies “the” culvert, and what purpose is it serving? And what is the purpose of qualifying the culvert’s “foot”?
Arguably the most theoretically interesting possibility is a grated sewer drain mounted on a concrete disk near the “foot” of the trail. While a sewer drain is not traditionally qualified as a culvert, it does perform a comparable task in a comparable condition, meeting the dictionary definition of an engineered, enclosed drainage system. If we are generically matching things without consideration for function or purposeful communication, the disk it is mounted on correlates to the “millstone” in image 10, and includes a square opening found directly in the center although comparatively disproportionate. This however poses a conflict for those who follow the Locust Street Ravine Trail, which includes a comparable “millstone” likeness in the form of a historic concrete drain cover at the base of that trail. Why would Byron’s true solution send investigators in so many alternative directions without the apparent presence of explicit instruction? A lack of clear and distinguished instruction supports the claim that Lake Park is not a viable solution.
Below the bridge
Walk 100 paces
While the South Lighthouse Ravine Trail is found below this bridge, it is comprised partially of stairs. Can you take paces on a stair? That’s highly suspicious.
I recently walked this trail for research purposes, attempting to apply our 100 paces. By pace 94 I was a few feet from the road, while the presence of stairs prevented me from taking full paces at least half a dozen times. If this clue is intended to place us at the tree line near a birch tree, we are well past that location in less than 100 paces. Results may also vary depending on what side of the bridge (east or west) you begin your 100 paces from which is not explicitly defined by the puzzle.
If instead traversing the North Lighthouse Ravine Trail, the presence of stairs once again inhibits the smooth application of 100 paces, we are still given no explicit starting position, while our 100 “paces” terminates well before the end of the path amidst densely wooded surroundings.
It also seems curious that we make a big deal over ascending into the park, only to descend out of the park back onto Lincoln Memorial Dr. five lines later. That’s not to say this isn’t possible, but it’s highly suspicious as well.
To the first young birch
Pass three, staying west
The most common application of this clue…is a literal birch tree, ignoring the qualifiers “first” and “young”. If we see a singular birch, how are we expected to know its first and young compared to any other birch? If it is younger than another birch tree, then it is not the first. If we believe this birch is the only one, one of the few ways it could be first and young simultaneously, then how long must we scour the woods of Lake Park to confirm or disavow that possibility?
We have the additional issue of the previous instruction, which applies extremely imprecise measurements and omissive instruction to impossibly arrive at a precise tree within densely wooded pockets of trees.
A secondary attempt is made by suggesting this line signifies the “first” in a series of birches progressively alluded to by the clues “pass three” and “proud tall fifth”. The first issue is, what direction do we travel in? The verse tells us to stay west while passing three, meaning either to go west or stay west of something. If we are supposed to stay west of something, where does the painting or the verse clearly indicate what that is without inserting personal assumption, and how do we know what direction to travel in? At that point, you could “stay west” of anything to the east.
If we are supposed to go west, there is really only one of two options: ascend back into the park traveling northwest via the North Lighthouse Ravine Trail or travel southwest along Lincoln Memorial and away from Lake Park. And if we apply option A., we return roughly to our point of origin from several lines earlier, rendering that instruction arguably arbitrary. Either option for our first young birch creates interpretive and directional deficiencies that suggest Lake Park is not a viable solution in Milwaukee for The Secret.
If applying the James Renner/Expedition: Unknown model, we drool over a random birch stump, completely ignore instruction leading to this point, inexplicably ascend back into the park, find the number 33 on a random light post, and position ourselves near a lion statue through self-determination rather than puzzle instruction.
On a proud, tall fifth
At its southern foot
We have several discrepancies here that suggest Lake Park is not a viable solution. Firstly, if our “proud, tall fifth” is a lion statue, how do we undoubtedly reach our intended destination exclusively resulting from Byron’s expert communication? In most cases we have to reascend into the park from Lincoln Memorial Dr. a second time, and randomly place ourselves at the “foot” of a lion statue. I have seen numerous attempts to negotiate such incoherent instruction, failing to produce convincing results.
Secondly, when applying the lion statues, they are not tall. In fact, the lion statues are one of the shortest structures in the park. So, how does this application of the word “tall” qualify as clear and reasonable communication to differentiate this interpretation from anything else? If Byron includes three words with apparent purpose, why do we only incorporate two? Do these words not qualify what is an adequate interpretation and what isn’t?
Thirdly, and this is more subtle, but why is “proud” and “tall fifth” separated by a comma? It might be nothing, or it might be something. There is an interpretation where the comma does absolutely mean something…
Fourthly, how we determine what “southern foot” might mean is an interesting process. Conventional wisdom has us line up our southern foot with a spot on the ground, but is that what the verse is saying? If the word “at” just means within the general vicinity of the lion’s southern foot, it is impossible to determine what the precise dig location would be as distance and direction are left unspecified, unless we are directly against the base of the statue, which seems unlikely for logistical reasons. Do we qualify “southern foot” as south facing feet or the southern most foot of any particular statue? Out of eight statues this gives us numerous options given no clarity from the verse or the painting.
Lastly, if proud tall fifth indicates the last in a series of trees, then where is the letter from the country, which must be “on” the tall fifth? Are we really going to theorize that a random tree may have had some variety of sign on it in the past? That seems highly unlikely and is purely speculative.
The Painting
In Chicago, the image gave us contextual clues to identify the correct side of town, and employed several notable and explicitly illustrated landmarks for confirming verse interpretations. The Cleveland image offers a very similar brand of visual confirmation. For all of the talk that the nine unconfirmed cases must convincingly conform to their three officially confirmed counterparts, the Milwaukee image, when applied to Lake Park, inexplicably fails to conform to this commonly agreed upon standard.
If fact, when it comes to the image, any Lake Park interpretation leaves more questions than answers. A large segment of visual clues are left unapplied. Why is city hall in the painting? What purpose does it serve? If the rebus spells “Mill-walk-key”, we don’t need City Hall to identify image 10’s municipal identity. If the woman is meant to represent a lion statue, why is she standing at the base of city hall when in reality Lake Park is north of City Hall and at a higher elevation? Why is the woman’s hand a perfect match to a relief of Solomon Juneau near Downtown Milwaukee? Why does a silhouette of a bell appear in the hand of the woman, seemingly being projected by the floating red ball? What is the haze covered domed structure on the left-hand side of the image? What is the obscure sliver barely in frame on the right side of the image. Why does the letter “L” in the cloak have a curved vertical member? Why does an amethyst qualified as purple by the book appear blue? If Lake Park offers such a convincing answer, why does the image conversely offer so much uncertainty? These apparent omissions cast considerable doubt on Lake Park’s legitimate contention as a Secret solution, alternatively suggesting Lake Park is not a viable solution.
The image matches we do have fail to serve any significant purpose beyond generically existing, suggesting that Lake Park is not a viable solution. The red balls match balls at the bocce court, the millstone emulates a historic sewer cover, the key mimics a bird’s eye view of the staircase, four trees are seen in the cloak when turning the large letter L sideways which some suggest eludes to the proud 5th being a tree, a curved shadowy structure within the lower right quadrant of our city hall depiction is said to represent a locust for Locust St Ravine Trail on the northern end of Lake Park, and the woman could be a lion statue. That’s it. That’s all we can really say about the image beyond a few general references to Milwaukee, meaning that Lake Park is not a viable solution for Milwaukee.
In addition, these are all matches at Lake Park itself. What this means is we have no conclusive visual hits for the first 4700 feet of the proposed path!! Again, given the aforementioned standard of requiring proposed answers to emulate confirmed cases, how does any Lake Park interpretation truly comply to commonly mandated expectation?
In regard to the woman, to say she looks like a Lake Park lion statue is a subjective face value claim lacking any clear confirming elements. You can certainly argue that the hood of the woman’s cloak faintly resembles a lion in general but fails to convincingly emulate statue characteristics. And why is she wearing a ragged cloak if representing a location in an affluent neighborhood?
It should be noted that JJP recently revealed that he remembers discussing the lion statue as the “lady” with Byron. JJP does not elaborate further on context or the intent behind this inclusion. For those who believe this “proves” Lake Park, I would like an explanation for the woman’s hand reasonably emulating a relief of Solomon Juneau on the outskirts of downtown, with a bell silhouette in the hand signifying the bell at city hall named for Juneau.
Or posed in another manner, imagine that Chicago had never been solved, and JJP mentions a conversation with Byron about the Chicago Water Tower. In reality, the Chicago Water Tower was used both as a directional device not appearing in person along the path and as a red herring, so keep that in mind…
This leaves us with one final instrumental element left unaccounted for: the immigrant culture. The conventional application of German immigration, as identified in the Litany of the Jewels on page 21 of the book, is paired logically and appropriately with Milwaukee. As stated previously, Milwaukee is a city absolutely teeming with rich examples of diverse ethnic identities and cultural expressions. Entire neighborhoods and stretches of city terrain convey multi-generational narratives through iconic architecture, historic landmarks, and uniquely Milwaukee quirks. In a city ripe with opportunity, Lake Park fails to deliver. While it may possess some interesting history as many places do, it’s an odd and anticlimactic choice when the bordering “Wahl” street serves as the primary reference to German immigration. While some will undoubtedly point to the Chicago solve as evidence that such a choice is defendable, opportunities for cultural expression within the puzzle between the two cities is not comparable. Chicago does not offer the same concentration of applicable cultural characteristics that Milwaukee does.
And how does a lion statue, or Lake Park in general, relate in any definitive terms to the litany clue “Imperial star of Germany”, reportedly a direct reference to some element of the casque location itself? This “litany” of omissions suggests that Lake Park is not a viable solution.
Lake Park Solution Pros:
-Generic verse matches to things like the bridge and a birch tree
-A linear presentation of accurate matches across the first 11 lines
-Accurate image match to red balls in association with other verse/image matches
-Locust in image correlates to Locust St. ravine trail
-92 step staircase (historically in theory) and double C configuration for “grand 200”
-Contextually specific verse interpretations including “woman with harpsichord” and “beating of the world”
-“Proud tall fifth” connected to 5th zodiac and lions traveling in “prides”
-Millstone looks like a nearby historic drain cover
-JJP says he remembers discussing the woman’s identity in image 10 as a lion statue
Lake Park Solution Cons:
-No precise starting location or direction of travel established by puzzle
-No image match of any variety for first nine lines of verse
-Many image devices and details left unused
-No clear application of City Hall
-Lack of confirmation for clue interpretations beyond initial “matches”
-No confirmation for “3 who lived there” despite multiple options
-Lack of direction between staircase and “compass”
-No precise casque location identified by verse or image
-Inability to apply “At a distance in time”
-Compass is not in most cases “passed”
-Lack of dictionary accurate “culvert”
-Paces taken on stairs
-Many interpretations offer uninteresting references to commonly found things like street signs, rocks, dirt, and trees
-Lack of explanation for sentence structure and language nuance
-No application of words “at” and “from” beyond moving in straight line past street signs
-Lack of meaningful immigration inclusion despite countless opportunities
-Inconsistent structure when compared to confirmed solutions (depending on personal philosophy)
-Verse interpretation leads away from intended casque site
-No reason why the lion statues are “tall”
-Clue interpretations seemingly lead in multiple different directions
-No reasonable explanation for JT clue regarding “beating of the world”
-Confusing placement of woman relative to city hall if woman is a “lion statue”
-No explanation for “Litany of the Jewels” clue
-No explanation for blue gem identified as purple in the book
Conclusion
As a final note, while there is certainly not enough evidence here to certify Lake Park as an authentic, comprehensive solution, there are also too many clear and specific references appearing in a logical and often organized fashion to downgrade the proto-typical Lake Park proposal as the product of a coincidence…which creates a conundrum. If Lake Park is not a viable solution, but it’s not a coincidence…then what is it??? Furthermore, we can say exactly the same about verse 8 Montreal proposals that share curious parallels with Lake Park. These are by far and away the two most common uses of verse 8…and yet…at best…despite striking similarity, and a degree of evidence exceeding coincidental manifestation…at least one is wrong. But what if they are both wrong…and what if…one of the images tells you? Click here for that answer.
Leave a Reply