When a surveyor visited the relevant fields in 2012, the site could not be found. The grass was high, the ground uncooperative, and the local landowner had no knowledge of any such feature, directing attention instead to a nearby bowl-barrow, a rounded earthen mound of the kind typically raised over prehistoric burials, which is recorded separately in the area.

The 2012 survey, carried out by David McGuinness, left the matter formally unresolved. The mound is listed but unlocated, a category that sits somewhere between absence and possibility. It may have been ploughed flat over centuries of agricultural use, or it may simply have been swallowed by vegetation on the day of the visit. The cautious phrasing in the survey report, "possibly obscuring low-visibility features", leaves open the chance that something remains beneath the surface, too subtle to read from ground level without the right conditions.

What is quietly interesting about a site like this is not its obscurity but its status. It occupies a strange administrative limbo, acknowledged in the record but unverified in the field, neither confirmed nor written off. The bowl-barrow the landowner pointed to is a real, recorded monument; the burial mound beside it, if it ever existed as a distinct feature, has for now retreated entirely from view.