No artifacts have been reliably reported as coming from the mound, or even from the general area around the mound. The surrounding field is in cultivation in several of the early photographs, so surface visibility has been good throughout much of the time the mound has been under investigation. Newkumet's 1940 notes make no mention of artifacts, and Shaeffer (1956:4) explicitly states the lack of artifacts found on or around the mound. The current land owner, Frank Etter, recalls recovering no artifacts even after continuing excavations into both the east and south tunnels (personal communication 2004). More recent investigators have failed to find artifacts as well. At least ten archaeologists from the AAS and other institutions have visited the site since 1972, and found no prehistoric artifacts. Much of the mound's internal structure has been exposed during this time. Numerous AAS archaeologists have also examined ground cleared for construction, foundation trenches, and other disturbances in the area immediately surrounding the mound, again without finding a single artifact or feature.

Aside from the mound itself, no prehistoric sites have been reported within a radius of about five kilometers. At least three cultural resource management surveys have been conducted within a few kilometers of the site (Heartfield 1984; Hilliard 1981; McAlexander 1994). Although these surveys were all fairly limited in scope, all included surface and subsurface investigations, but failed to recover any prehistoric artifacts.

There are three references to artifacts from the site descriptions above. AAS personnel found turtle shell of recent origin and a historic button or closure on the mound in 1979, neither relate to the prehistoric construction or use of the mound. Dollar notes that while he had found no artifacts personally, "other individuals have made small finds, some dubious as to relationship to the mound, and all somewhat inconclusive. Among these finds was one small potsherd, found in the southwestern quarter of the field immediately around the mound, [and] the stone end of a war club, broken and of poor quality" (1958:2). In his letters to both McGimsey and Bell, Rogers reports being told that "a number of fine artifacts had been recovered" (1958:3) from the southern tunnel.

Dollar's reported artifacts, as he states, are of "dubious relationship" to the mound, and Rogers' reports are rumors of artifacts found 50 to 60 years earlier. It is impossible to dismiss Rogers' report entirely, but it seems likely that if "a number of fine artifacts" had been found there would be more of record of the find than one vague rumor.