This geophysical survey was completed using SENSYS FGM650 sensors with data logger. Readings were recorded at a resolution of 0.01nT and data collected with a traverse interval of 0.5 m and a sample interval of 0.16 - 0.25 m using a quad-towed non-magnetic cart-based configuration The geophysical survey produced good data throughout but has not revealed any anomalies of definite archaeological origin. The survey undertaken over the Scheduled Monument (Field 9) has revealed a generally weaker background magnetic response throughout the majority of the feature. This is likely to indicate the bank is comprised of mostly homogenous upcast material of a similar magnetic response to the underlying geological deposits adjacent to the canal rather than the bank being a reconstruction or containing deposits of more recent and modern material. A large weakly enhanced sinuous anomaly has been interpreted as a paleochannel and is the most prominent feature identified. This is located in the northern portion of Field 5 and continues westward into Field 4. Such features can contain archaeological deposits. A half-circular, weakly positive anomaly that has tentatively been interpreted as a possible ring-ditch has been recorded in Field 3. However, the anomaly is too weak to confidently interpret and may be caused by modern agricultural activity. Two, weakly positive pit-like anomalies have also been identified in Field 7, which may indicate features associated with former extraction activity or refuse pits. However, these may be the result of localised variation in the magnetic susceptibility of the geological deposits, or nature pit features. Five, former field boundaries are noted within the dataset and correspond to land division illustrated on historical Ordnance Survey (OS) maps (1830's - 1880's).
Lawrence et al. (Wed,) studied this question.