If you think you have found something... keep going with it. Don't expect teams of academics to climb into their cars and drive down to see you and anoint you. They don't do that kinda thing academics. That is like expecting a liguistic scholar to come and check out a regional variation on pronunciation. Likewise dont expect vanloads of archaeo's to come charging down to see what you are looking at and pat you on the back. Most of them are only employed on rescue archaeology and have busy schedules.
I found some lovely figurative (ie. non-abstract) rock art stuff a few years back while on my holidays a hundred miles from home. The finds were close by an existing (cup and ring) rock art site. The local "specialist" in the field didn't want to know and was too unfit to walk up to the site (two hundred yards along a good path from the road). She did not want to look at photos either. She was 84.
I didn't give up. I showed the photos to my local archaeologist when I got back home. He was pleased I hadn't given up, but didn't know what to make of my discovery, he said he'd "never seen anything like it". He was surprised they hadn't been noticed before being so close to an existing cup and ring site (the "new" motifs had only emerged through peat erosion over the last few years) but agreed they looked very old. He also told me some wise words "When people visit an existing site they know what they are going to see - and that is (often) ALL they see. Nothing else." In other words... if you keep a pair of fresh eyes on you, you might notice something which maybe no-one else has noticed.

I contacted the West of Scotland team which takes on local authority archaeology duties in the area of my discovery. The co-ordinator emailed me back pronto and told me they were definitely man-made and ancient, pretty much unique and definitely not natural cracks or marks. He was excited.
I contacted Historic Scotland whose regional "specialist" said they were natural in origin ("the result of water course erosion") and not man-made ("I can see no peck marks"). The motifs are at the top of a hill, have never had a water course near them and are covered in peck marks.
However the Royal Commission (RCAHMS) were happy to put the photos on their website and include them in their Discovery and Excavation publication.
I seriously doubt if any "academic" or state-employed archaeologist has visited the site in the last couple of years since my discovery. But that doesn't matter. I've photographed it, participated in two wee films about it and the discovery is "out there". I've done my bit. I don't give a hoot what "academics" think (or more likely don't think). I didn't want anything except other people to see them. And maybe someone "official" to strip the peat back a bit (to see what else is there) and clean the carvings up (they are covered in lichen and stuff).
Indeed learned academics at (to pick just one example) the University of Reading confidently claim that "rock carvings in Britain are entirely abstract.". They are NOT "entirely abstract" as my own and other people's discoveries have shown... but it is hard to wake up some academics...
Just keep photographing, videoing and measuring Rockhopper! Don't get stuck with academics, keep doing your thing...

(Post us some pictures please... or stick one of your videos up on Youtube and post a link on this thread)