Recent Missouri Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted May 22, 2018, by Steve Ellison (c10burb [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is no longer open to traffic making County Road 323 a dead end road from either end.

Posted May 22, 2018, by Rusty Weisman

On Sept 4, 1966, one of the four spans was demolished by a tractor trailer truck loaded with potatoes driven by Judson O. Bullis of Iowa Falls Ia. Bullis was killed in the crash.

The bridge reopened on Sept. 23 1966 following repairs by State Highway Dept. crews working in conjunction with Parson's Construction Co. of New London MO.

Posted May 21, 2018, by Remick Bloss (remickbl [at] gmail [dot] com)

I am glad to finally see more photos of this bridge. Traveled down this road several years back, but were unable to see the portion hidden by the trees or the black girder bridge that was behind that building.

Posted May 19, 2018, by Curtis Hudson

The bridge is sadly still closed, but it appears to be moving closer to its rehabilitation! Hope to see it open in the not so distant future!

Posted May 18, 2018, by Francis (francisbittner77 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Does this bridge have a factory near it or did it have a factory near it??

Posted May 12, 2018, by Jim Kuntz (jimkyos [at] charter [dot] net)

County of bridge: Franklin County

Location of bridge: Labadie Bottom Rd. & Fiddle Creek, Labadie

Bridge built: 1920

Abandoned after 1993

The 1993 flood, one of the worst in all of history on either the Missouri River or the Mississippi River, caused this creek to flood and as result flooded the entire bottom land, and even the nearby power plant.

Because of this flood, a levees were repaired along the Missouri River, and new levees were built along Fiddle Creek and Tavern Creek.

The levee along Fiddle Creek caused the Labadie Bottom Road to be re-routed, and thus causing the abandonment of this bridge.

The floods of 2012 and 2015 caused the bridge to be, first severely damaged, than collapsing.

Posted May 2, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Nice to see the Jefferson Highway sign placed on it.

Posted April 28, 2018, by James McCray (jamesinslocomb [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I think a good idea for this bridge is to close the bridge to vehicles, but leave it open for pedestrians as a park. Have the newer parallel 66 bridges (I-44 or Rt 66 4 lane bypass) as vehicle bridges and the D.E.B. as a pedestrian park.

Posted April 28, 2018, by Joseph (Weisbrodjoseph [at] gmail [dot] com)

I was out here the other day and noticed that there is some damage to the east portal strut and portal bracing. It looks like too big a vehicle tried to go through and bent the portal bracing up and the portal strut is half disconnected from the end post. It's rather concerning and is NOT pretty. I'll go back soon and grab photos and when I can. It's a shame especially after the beautiful restoration.

Posted April 24, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I believe this is the structure in question. This was taken from a ATSF bridge book.

Posted April 24, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Looks more like 1900-1920, to me


Posted April 23, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

My guess is the main plate girder span is a lot older than 1950 maybe relocated and reused here in 1950. The riveted floobeams make the plate girder span look particularly old.

Posted April 13, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

There were a couple of through trusses over the Blackwater that are now UCEBs. I don't recall a Monkey Mountain in Johnson County. There is such a place east of Grain Valley in Jackson, probably farther than students would want to drive just to hang out. Talking with a local when I visited Hobblet Bottom he spoke of a through truss near there but thought it was abandoned long ago. I have not found a location such as he described.

This is the sort of thing I enjoy exploring.

Posted April 13, 2018, by Don Morrison

Monkey Mountain was apparently north of Warrensburg.

Here's a bridge that was poular with students, then removed in 2013:

Posted April 13, 2018, by Todd W. Baslee (twbaslee [at] sbcglobal [dot] net)

Recent story on Union Bridge by KOMU-TV8 News Columbia, MO:

Wednesday, March 28, 2018 3:14:00 PM CDT in News

By: Nnamdi Egwuonwu, KOMU 8 Reporter

PARIS - Despite facing heavy rainfall and hard winds, the historic Union Covered Bridge in Monroe County is still standing.

"The water has receded by several feet today," said Monroe County Sheriff James Hoffman.

After rainfall caused water levels to rise nearly 21 inches yesterday, many residents and officials began to fear that the 147-year old bridge was meeting its end. But after a night of worrying, Hoffman said the bridge is okay.

"As long as we don't have any high water again - to where trash and debris would come down the river and actually hit the bridge and take it out - I think we're in pretty good shape," Hoffman said.

Nearby residents continued visiting the bridge Wednesday. Many said they were happy they didn't have to say goodbye.

"It's the greatest day of my life thus far," said Verlena Clinton, a resident who's lived close to the bridge for over 70 years. "It's a piece of history that we can not replace or repair."

According to the Missouri State Parks website, the bridge is one of the four remaining covered bridges in the state and was built in 1871. It is on the National Register of Historic Places.

The bridge is currently being renovated. Sheriff Hoffman said contractors will consider the bridge's stability when renovating.

"I don't think [contractors] were expecting water of this magnitude to come through there," Hoffman said.

The sheriff couldn't say what specific measures would be taken or when the renovations are expected to be finished.

Once renovations are complete the bridge will be reopened to the public.

Posted April 13, 2018, by Todd W. Baslee (twbaslee [at] sbcglobal [dot] net)

Okay all - I need your help. While I know my bridges in my local area I am trying to remember one in particular from my college days in Warrensburg and a popular party spot. This would have been back in the late eighties and early nineties.

We called the area Monkey Mountain. That is all I can recall about it. The supposed story was someone got killed by a circus monkey in the area. I know it's a long shot but I've got to see what is left of the site - 30 years later.

Thanks for the help.


Posted April 7, 2018, by Anonymous

The older bridge looks like it was several yards to the Southwest of the current one too, probably related to the lonely post shown in photo 9 and 7.

Posted April 7, 2018, by MFT

It looks like there was a different bridge here in 1960. Somewhere between 1960 and 1995 the bridge was changed out to the current truss.

Posted March 31, 2018, by David Huffman

The entire bridge is being shifted to add a 5th eastbound lane.

Posted March 28, 2018, by William Benz (bubish [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge has, in fact, been demolished.

Posted March 28, 2018, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

Laura: I'm not sure where the plaque from the Laflin Bridge ended up. The Bollinger County Archives & Genealogical Center in Marble Hill might know the answer.

Posted March 26, 2018, by Laura Sample Inman (LauraInman65 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

My Grandfather David Rudolph Sample's name is on the plaque that was on this bridge. I truly would like to find the plaque if at all possible. He was a surveyor in Bollinger County in the early 1900's. it shows the plaque in photo # 103734. The photo was taken by James Baughn. the new bridge was built in 2006. Laura Inman

Posted March 26, 2018, by Charles E. Sample (cesample1946 [at] gmail [dot] com)

My Grandfather D. R. Sample was the surveyor for this bridge. Does anyone know where the plaque might be today?

Posted March 21, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Links in the comments below are dead. Here's a link to the page with the collection:

Posted March 15, 2018, by Caleb Farrenkopf (taxconsumption [at] yahoo [dot] com)

This bridge was removed and replaced by a low grade crossing by the city of chillicothe a year or so ago. The city also owns the old line that it crosses.

Posted March 6, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

I really like the street view traveling across this one. It's like going back 75 years in time.

Posted March 6, 2018, by Matthew Lane Siegmann (clarinetboy [at] netscape [dot] net)

This bridge existed before highway 65 existed. Originally this was the "Buffalo Road" now in many places of it's existence still named "Old Buffalo Road". In 1922, when the state highway system was created, the road was part of the original Route 3, which was renumbered US 65 in 1926, and as another poster stated, has been Highway H since 1981 (lettered highways were originally County highways). I'm not 100% sure how old this bridge is, possibly a later search through our local papers would have an article on it's construction.

Posted March 5, 2018, by Jason Smith (flensburg [dot] bridgehunter [dot] av [at] googlemail [dot] com)
Posted March 1, 2018, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

I think historical records say this is also called Dick's Bridge.

MoDOT Bridge (Missouri)
Posted February 28, 2018, by Jack Eastman (jackeast360 [at] gmail [dot] com)

MoDOT is demolishing the bridge, starting Mar 12, 2018 due to concerns about safety & loitering.

Posted February 26, 2018, by Chris Jones (milkmanchris [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I found this pic on the MODOT website's archive of highway maps. (1942)

Posted February 26, 2018, by joe wallace (joebosceola [at] gmail [dot] com)

In the 1880s the Osage was crossed at Osceola via three bridges from upstream to downstream -- 1) wagon bridge, 2) frisco RR, and 3) KC,C, and S RR

Posted February 23, 2018, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Correction to my previous comment; CR143 will be replaced, Whitaker Ford bridge in Marion County, not CR153.

Posted February 19, 2018, by John

I see the road deck is totally gone. What a waste.

Posted February 19, 2018, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

Workinbridges is no longer involved in the Gasconade River project.

Posted February 19, 2018, by Luke

You might want to fix your site's code.

Posted February 18, 2018, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Project Report Here: MoDOT inspection report from 2015 included with evidence of spalling roadway with exposed rebar, lead paint, section loss in the stringers and trusses. It's a big bridge and an expensive fix.

Posted February 12, 2018, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I assume that the bridge was not bypassed and preserved in place...

Posted February 12, 2018, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This is a stunning and tragic loss. This was an extremely significant bridge due to its unusual configuration and it's pairing of two very different spans.

Posted February 12, 2018, by Eric Kinkhorst (erick [dot] bud [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge has been replaced

Posted February 9, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Missouri is wiping out these state highway ponies at a discouraging rate. It would be nice to have at lease one left in place.

Posted February 8, 2018, by Mark Phillips (msp [dot] dwohio [at] gmail [dot] com)

Facebook group now focusing on preserving the Gasconade River Bridge:

Posted February 7, 2018, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

Workin' Bridges has withdrawn from this project.

Posted February 7, 2018, by Phil (Duffphil [at] hotmail [dot] com)

2/6/2018 Bridge update:

Informal conversation with Callaway County indicated that the alignment of the replacement bridge is not yet finalized.

As has been speculated, it may be preferred to move the replacement bridge upstream to resolve the hairpin turn in the existing road alignment.

This alone would not save the historic bridge, but could potentially buy some time if demolition is not required in order to construct the new bridge.

Posted February 5, 2018, by Patrick Chambers (elspode [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks for posting the Longview Road bridge shot. Far off, but the only one I've seen in forever! The pics of the other bridge are definitely not the Longview Road bridge. I had been familiar with Longview since 1969, and crossed it many times. I don't recall it ever having been decorated with potted flowers. Pretty sure the other bridge is smaller as well, and that it was over Mouse Creek, which forms the Easternmost arm of Longview Lake. That smaller bridge was part of the farm property, whereas the Longivew Road bridge was not.

Posted February 2, 2018, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Live TV News story from this bridge this week. Marion Co. commissioners are replacing several smaller bridges this year and bids will be let for the replacement of the Taylor bridge around Oct/Nov and construction would begin Jan 2019. See attached news story. In the meantime 3 other smaller bridges/culverts are in the works; Co Rd 153, CR404 and CR423. CR423, a non-descript concrete/girder span over Bear Creek in Withers Mill (built in 1950) Has already been removed this week. MODOT had deemed it as the worst bridge in Marion County. All three will likely be replaced by culverts.

Taylor Bridge news story.

Posted February 1, 2018, by Don Morrison


An article from October 2017 suggests the Taylor bridge is closed pending replacement in 2018.

Posted January 31, 2018, by Ruth Adkins (ruthadkins [at] gmail [dot] com)

I was hoping to see a photo of the old old bridge

Posted January 22, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Great to see a photo. It's much as I remember. I suggested a merge with

Posted January 21, 2018, by Neil Krout (kickinpony [dot] 66 [at] gmail [dot] com)

My wife and I went to this bridge today 1/21/18. Several of the deck boards are rotting, and will need to be replaced soon.

Posted January 19, 2018, by Anonymous

Start a petition drive.Get all the locals to sign it and anyone within 100 miles. Cite reasons for saving it.

Posted January 18, 2018, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

The Bird's Nest Bridge did just fine in last year's record-setting flood. The river reached a stage of 28.71 ft. on the USGS gage at Bird's Nest, a full 1.5 feet above the previous record.

Meanwhile, the idea that the bridge "could damn the river and flood steelville and a whole slew of houses" is preposterous. Looking at the FEMA flood insurance map, in order to threaten a "slew" of houses in Steelville, the Meramec would need to reach approximately 28 feet higher than last year's record.

To accomplish that feat, the entire floodplain of the Meramec would need to be dammed below the mouth of Whittenburg Creek, and the Bird's Nest Bridge doesn't come close to being long enough. More importantly, a dam would need to stand at least 55 feet above the normal river level to hold back enough water to threaten Steelville.

In what universe would it be possible to construct such a dam using only the girders and boards of the Bird's Nest Bridge?

Posted January 18, 2018, by THOMAS E MCQUIGGAN (mcqtomm [at] misn [dot] com)

The bridge was closed by the county as both unsafe for vehicular or pedestrian traffic. it was subsequently purchased by two steelville residents and the Made up "steelville historical society" for obvious reasons.., and has not been repaired. The bridge decking is really bad, and the county felt the bridge could collapse at any time.., 5 years ago.

Since the purchase nothing has been done to the bridge so it has not gotten safer than what the county determined 5 years ago.

The bigger problem is if the bridge gets hit by a flood and knocked over. This is a real possibility since the bridge supports are worn out. with the bridge in the river, it could damn the river and flood steelville and a whole slew of houses.

whose responsible.., the two buyers in my mind..., and the county.., which should never sold a condemned bridge to anyone.

Posted January 17, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)
Posted January 16, 2018, by Kenny Fairhurst (dwf0403 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge is as good as doomed if we don't try anything yet. C'mon people! Use your heads! If you wanna keep this old cantilevered truss, sitting around won't help.

Posted January 12, 2018, by Neil Krout (kickinpony [dot] 66 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I came across this photo in a Facebook group. I have no idea who first published the photo (it appears to be in a book).

Posted January 11, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

This is the first photo I've seen of this bridge. It was possibly the last one of many to be replaced in Jackson County where at one time there were probably at least a dozen of this pattern.

Posted January 10, 2018, by Phil Duff (Duffphil [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Photo detail of inscribed date in concrete on Callaway bridge approach.

Boone County Journal article, October 2017

Posted January 9, 2018, by Anonymous


As reported in the Boone County Journal in October 2017, this bridge has received a FLAP (Federal Lands Access Program) grant and is scheduled to be replaced with a modern two-lane bridge anticipated to open in the fall of 2019.

Surveying and design will take place in early 2018, and it is expected that the replacement bridge will necessitate complete demolition of the original bridge.

It is also reported that the road is planned to be realigned on the Callaway side to eliminate the hairpin turn required in the current road.

Congratulations to everyone involved that access will return at this crossing, (closed to vehicles since October 2016) and thank you to the commitment of Callaway and Boone Counties. I understand Callaway County has committed to maintain the new bridge.

If replaced as scheduled, the old bridge will have served for 110 years, and will be sorely missed.

If you are aware of any updates to this information, please post!

Posted January 7, 2018, by bridge inspector (inspector [at] bridge [dot] com)

how tall is this dam bridge

Posted January 6, 2018, by Neil Krout (kickinpony [dot] 66 [at] gmail [dot] com)

My wife and I happened upon this little jewel today. The name of the road has changed to "Horizon Trl", but it still has the 318 road signs, the road also has new gravel. The deck of the bridge appears to be in great shape, as it was probably replaced in the past couple of years, or so. It's nice to see that the plaque is still intact.

Posted January 6, 2018, by Anonymous

Bridge to be replaced in 2018

Posted January 5, 2018, by Kenny Fairhurst (dwf0403 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The tunnel is now used as equipment storage by the nearby Museum of Transportation.

Posted January 5, 2018, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

I grew up in nearby LaGrange in the 1970's and this was a favorite spot to come and just enjoy some peace & quiet. I had friends who came for other amorous events. No names, I am still friends with many of them.

Posted December 24, 2017, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

Yes, I posted an update a couple days ago.

Posted December 24, 2017, by Neil Krout (kickinpony [dot] 66 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I just learned this bridge is scheduled for replacement.

Posted December 21, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)


From what Iíve read about Bridge #9 in Minnesota, the original 1880s trusses were reused and retrofitted to hold a double track in the 20s, which is when the third truss Line was added.

As for this bridge, it might be possible that it was added as a piece from a different bridge which was scrapped.

Posted December 21, 2017, by Matt Lohry


The third truss, like the MN bridge you mentioned, was likely added as a retrofit to the existing bridge--as for Bridge #9 (the MN bridge), the third truss line was added later on to support the ever-increasing weight of trains. It was a solution that cost far less than replacing the entire structure. If the third truss line was original, I would think that it would be the same size as the outer 2, but in both of these cases the third truss members are much larger than the originals. The MN bridge third truss is also riveted, where the outers are pinned.

Posted December 21, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Looks like there is a third truss line in this massive structure. Other deck trusses Iíve seen like this were created of two trusses:


Posted December 21, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Visited here nearly at dusk. To get a good northern side view of the bridge you'll have to tromp about 200+ yards of brush on either side of river; not a problem this time of year. Only had time for a handful of pics with sun setting.

Posted December 19, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Revisited, Dec 18, 2017; water was WAY down here. In fact, it was barely flowing here as it has been dry most of 2017. I was able to get around from just about any angle w/o resorting to my boots. Will post photos as I get a chance. Bridge is easy to get to from MO Rt D, is in very good shape.

Posted December 18, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The story of A Bridge Troll who has lost his home? This story sounds quite riveting.

Posted December 18, 2017, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Revive66, Revive the American Road Trip, Revive the Gasconade River Bridge. This is one troll, we need lots. Help us, if you have kids.....

It's a contest! Win a Slammer BMX bike! Kids ages 2-17 are invited to create an image of a friendly troll named Grins. Our Grins has lost his home (a bridge in Iowa) and he is looking for a new home. He is traveling with his friend Cheery the Cardinal. Grins lost everything in a flood, including his mirror, so he needs YOUR help in discovering what he looks like! See contest rules here: Send your original drawings to Grins at Contest starts TODAY, December 18 and ends January 3, 2018.

Posted December 14, 2017, by Barry (bllauver [at] toad [dot] net)

There might be an interesting story behind this bridge. It appears to have been intentionally half-buried.

Posted December 12, 2017, by Jeremy (jeremyjhill [at] gmail [dot] com)

Ok, here are a bunch of pictures of both the bridge (from different angles) and the pile of "stuff" that is nearby, being overtaken by vines, rose bushes, and trees. I hope you all find this interesting. Thanks!

Posted December 11, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

The AHR-KC report in sources refers to a court record giving ca.1870 for the build date. We have another nearby:

Posted December 11, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Finally visited here, 12-08-17; very well maintained, two track gravel road from MO Rt M south to it. Bridge has new bolts installed. Wing walls & deck are in decent shape.

Posted December 11, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

This is not far from my dentist in Shelbina, so I visit here somewhat frequently. Shot some video here this visit, bridge is very unique with its' tall sides and picturesque setting.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

They look like cruciform outriggers to me. I am curious as to whether the date of Circa 1870 has been confirmed or not. I would expect a Circa 1870 iron bridge in this area to have been a Bowstring. I am not saying that a Pratt truss would not have been built in 1870, but the Bowstring was still the bridge of choice at that time.

In addition, I am not seeing any cast-iron members or cast-iron assemblies that would suggest a Circa 1870 construction date. Overall, this bridge looks more like an 1880s or 1890s bridge to me. It just happens to have some cruciform members which were popular in the 1870s.

If this bridge was in fact built in the 1870s then it would have been extremely significant, but even in 1890s bridge with cruciform outriggers is highly significant and worthy of preservation. Either way, it is too bad that this bridge was demolished.

Posted December 10, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Does photo six show a cruciform outrigger?

Posted December 9, 2017, by Mike Lasater (mtlasater [at] gmail [dot] com)

The Davis Street Ferry went from Carondelet in St. Louis City to East Carondelet, IL. St. Louis County was not part of the equation.

Red Bridge (Missouri)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

Good to know Clark - looked a little off limits, and was essentially told as so, will head up to check out old trail path

Red Bridge (Missouri)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

West end leads to Minor Park where you can still see the path worn by wagons heading up the hill after coming through the ford as they moved along the Santa Fe Trail. Not private at all--enjoy.

Posted December 8, 2017, by Anonymous

New bridge opened to traffic 9-1-17.

Red Bridge (Missouri)
Posted December 8, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

Visited today posted photos of the new urban walkway that has been created along the bridge, the west end quickly dead ends into private land now. Love locks have taken over the railings and other miscellaneous spots all over the bridge there must be thousands of them now. Fresh coat of paint, looking good, great attraction for the county and Minor Park.....Mr. Truman would be proud still

Posted December 8, 2017, by Jeremy (jeremyjhill [at] gmail [dot] com)

Thanks for the comments and the information/education. I'll try to get some pictures this weekend and I'll post them back here.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

aaah....good stuff. Love the story.

Posted December 6, 2017, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

The county GIS website doesn't show this road, suggesting that it is private:

The old series MoDOT map of St. Charles County does show this road, but uses the dotted line symbol for a private road.

The new series MoDOT map does not show this road:

This bridge is not listed in the National Bridge Inventory.

The Census Bureau's TIGER dataset does not show this road -- which is rather odd since it includes both public and private roads.

Google Maps does label this road as Bastean Road, but I believe that's a mistake. The county GIS map shows another Bastean Road to the east leading to a subdivision, and that is a public road. It appears that Google Map is confused, which is not that unusual.

All signs point to this being a private drive.

Posted December 6, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

Last time I was here the sign at Rt P entrance claimed it was a private drive. I have a fellow rail fan who said owner has called county sheriff on anyone on this road. That was 10 yrs ago. Dead end road but pretty sure it is maintained by county. At the north end of this road was a 2nd bridge (at one time) over Big Creek StL&HRR Bridge No. 116, from there the RR went to Owen. Big Creek was a 62' Thru girder w a 13 pile approach on one end and a 12 pile approach on the other.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Private property per the county GIS. Owner contact info can be found there as well.

Posted December 6, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I donít necessarily buy that this is a private bridge. I know some landowners like marking property that isnít theirs. If google has an actual name for the road, I would assume that the road still shows up as public on recent GIS surveys, to the best of my knowledge.

Posted December 6, 2017, by K. Allen Ballard (speedeeprint [at] gmail [dot] com)

At the moment, this is the best photo I have. This is a digital scan of an old school photo I took in 2009. Hopefully, I can get a better one(s) in the near future.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

For those interested in a detailed discussion of bridge types and other information, head on over to Nathan Holth's page:

This link will provide discussions of overall design as well as detail/assembly design.

Posted December 6, 2017, by Michael Quiet (mquiet [at] gmail [dot] com)

It sounds like it might have been shortened to fit this crossing, as that would explain the extra bridge parts lying around. That would also explain why this only has 1 set of counters (if it was the first panel of a longer pratt pony), and also why its disproportionately tall for being such a short span.

Jeremy, if you can ever snag a picture or two of that parts pile that would surely help with figuring out the story behind this. In any event its certainly a neat little bridge!

Posted December 5, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)


Truss types can be a bit confusing. I will try to find a chart and post it here. For some reason my smart phone is being difficult tonight and not letting me attach a link. If you have any questions about identifying truss types, the folks on here will be glad to help you out.

When I was first looking at bridges as a teenager, I really didn't know what I was doing. At that time I did not know a pin connected truss from a riveted one. It is all a learning process.

Posted December 5, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

There are also two fords shown on the 1982 Bruner quad, one on each of the roads leading from the bridge site toward the schools.

Posted December 5, 2017, by James Baughn (webmaster [at] bridgehunter [dot] com)

I tracked down a map from 1939 which shows a Sherrow School located about a mile east of the original bridge site. (I've circled the bridge in red.) There was also a Roberts School located to the southeast. So the Sherrow Ford name makes sense.

Posted December 5, 2017, by Jeremy (jeremyjhill [at] gmail [dot] com)

Also, the lady gave us the name Sherrow Ford bridge, if that means anything to anyone. Not sure if that means anything to anyone...

Posted December 5, 2017, by Jeremy Hill (jeremyjhill [at] jmark [dot] com)

Thanks for the kind words. Unfortunately, I'm not well educated about the bridge types and, frankly, I didn't even know that these older bridges existed until I bought this property and this bridge was on it. So the talk about five panel pratts and queenposts frankly go over my head. Sorry. Here's what I know:

I bought the property last year. The gentleman who put the bridge here died a few years ago and I bought the place from his kids who don't have any info about provenance.

My wife visited a local feed store a couple weeks ago and was visiting with the person behind the counter and when she found out where we lived, she gave us the location of where the Bridge came from, and the name "Roberts Ford". That's how I found this listing on (mainly through googling) and some old google image searches. The timelines that the person at the feed store gave us line up with the rough timeframes that I know the gentlemen who passed away was working on the property (he also completely renovated the 1880 farmhouse that we live in around the same time). That is all to say that I don't have concrete proof that this is the same bridge, but I have local folks telling me it is, and circumstantial and anecdotal evidence that it likely is.

Also, the original location for Roberts Ford is only about 5 miles (give or take) from my house where the bridge is now.

I'll add that there is a big mess of unused bridge parts under a tree on the property. I'm assuming they are parts that the guy didn't use. If anyone on here is local(ish) and has a desire to see what is here, feel free to contact me.


Posted December 5, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Maybe he only took one of the two spans. Also, as Robert keenly noted, the diagonals are not in an "X" in the center panel, so as a result of this, it looks to me like a five panel Pratt truss could have been shortened into the Queenpost we see here. As I understand, diagonal members are "optional" bracing members in a Queenpost. I think some covered bridges and roof trusses omit diagonals. Most steel truss Queenpost bridges have them, but I think they are more like counters rather than diagonal members. So I think this bridge as configured probably still provides a Queenpost function even with the unusual diagonal situation.