That's grim Roy. Do you think the state is worse than when you went with the EH person?

Really does look like it was intentionally targeted to muck the place up (ie to deter visitors).

I can’t get over just how close the bank now is to the monument (comparing your photo here and the etching by Charles Knight here). Even allowing for artistic licence in Knight’s etching the bank must have extended much further than it does now. Frankly, another spell of wet weather and it’s not too fanciful to think the whole structure might go.

Good luck with the book by the way :-)

Nigel, you asked the other day if I had any photos proving movement at Trethevy. Have a look at this and form your own opinion.

The first pic is a plan of the quoit by Barnatt in 1982. Look at stone four which has a large gap between it and the stone next to it. Now look at the second pic and see how the capstone has drawn it forward until leaning against that same stone. Stone 4 is the one on the right taken from inside the tomb. I'll leave it to you to decide.

https://picasaweb.google.com/100525707086862773355/TrethevyMisplacedStone?authkey=Gv1sRgCM6zhta3xbPxGA#

Just been comparing C.W.Dymond's 1877 ground plan to that of John Barnatts 1982 version. It is interesting that CW not only shows the ground plan layout but the 'lean' on the stones as well, indicated by the dotted lines. You will note on the far south-west stone on the left he shows said dotted lines as being away from the adjacent stone as well, where today they are touching. Of course the problem with this is that it doesn't show the 'middle' between the top and bottom where is actually touches so hopefully, if John Barnatt replies to my email he may be able to clear that up...certainly in his drawing some 105 years later anyway.
https://picasaweb.google.com/100525707086862773355/DropBox?authkey=Gv1sRgCPmU2MWil9rM9AE#5852155605660104418

Mr Goutté has sent in some recent photographs showing the present condition of the land around Trethevy Quoit.