In limbo, but perhaps the right public figure has stepped forward?
Combination wood/metal truss. Very rustic.
I think this needs to be merged with this page http://bridgehunter.com/nd/cavalier/brickmine/
I've also found several in my region of Iowa that he listed as lost that, while they no longer showed in the NBI, were merely abandoned (Thus the de-listing.), not lost.
No problem at all. Found a few that were marked replaced or lost that are still there.
Bridge is still there. Currently sitting in the road on the north side of the old crossing.
Thank you for catching this error. It is a big problem when bridges are listed as lost when they are not, because nothing is more frustrating than doing a bridge trip and skipping a bridge because you think its gone when it in fact still exists. For some reason a number of years ago (looks like around 2012) Jason erroneously listed a bunch of bridges as Lost and I have since found a number of those were in error and I have corrected them as I come across them. Not sure if he found a bad news article or what, but as you can see its taken a while to track those all down and get the statuses corrected. Thanks again for catching this.
Of the two crossings of the Heart River on the NP mainline, this bridge appears to be the same as:
The bridge to the east (1st Crossing) was replaced in 1960, and was sent to a washout on the branch line south of Mandan (http://bridgehunter.com/nd/morton/fort-lincoln-trolley/). It seems that the only bridge this photo could be is the still extant BNSF bridge.
Because of this, I propose that the two pages are merged.
Its said that this bridge was reused elsewhere..does anybody know where?
Is this bridge available?
This one also has a shape similar to the post-1910 American Bridge Company plaques. Instead, these are Keystone products. These two also have this shape plaque:
A group hoping to save the Bismarck-Mandan Rail Bridge can continue to search for public partners after meeting a key federally set deadline last week.
Friends of the Rail Bridge wants to stop BNSF Railway from demolishing the 138-year-old bridge spanning the Missouri River to make way for a new structure. The organizations signed an agreement with the U.S. Coast Guard in January outlining paths to either keeping or removing the bridge.
The railway has been going through the permitting process with the Coast Guard for a new bridge for more than three years. The Coast Guard decides on projects proposed along that part of the Missouri River to “ensure the structure does not unreasonably affect navigation,” according to a Federal Register notice.
A decision on the permit is scheduled for Jan. 22, 2022.
Friends of the Rail Bridge had until March 15 to establish a public-private partnership that would eventually take ownership of the historic bridge to prevent its demolition and covert it to a pedestrian bridge. The Burleigh County Commission voted on the last day to allow the group access to additional liability insurance through the North Dakota Insurance Reserve Fund, which meets the partnership requirements outlined in the agreement, according to Brian Dunn, chief of the Coast Guard Office of Bridge Programs.
[more at link]
I checked in with the Historic Bridge Foundation and have some further info. Everyone should sign the support letter, but that it is a little more complicated than the simple statement that a decision about the bridge's future will be made in 45 days. The Historic Bridge Foundation and the National Trust to name a couple organizations are consulting parties on this project and we will update you as the project moves forward. Sending FORB a letter of support or signing the petition will help them in their efforts to move the project forward.
I encourage everybody to sign this letter of support. This group has 45 days to find support for saving this bridge. Baby steps..
The demolition occurred around 6pm Friday, October 9, 2020. I think it was a combination of weight and width. I'm guessing that the plow hit the endpost. "The Highway Patrol said 41-year-old Kris Walcker was pulling a large plow with a John Deere tractor."
I realize the reason we are doing away with truss bridges is because they aren't idiot-proof but I suspect that nature will simply make a bigger idiot.
Some idiot farmer decided a great thing to do would be to full a massive piece of farm equipment over this pin-connected truss in an equally massive tractor. Now, thanks to his complete lack of brain cells North Dakota, with its very small surviving collection of historic bridges, has one less historic bridge. https://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/velva-ar...
Please let me know if this bridge is available. Thanks
Some writing on the side of this span suggests it may have come from the Spokane area. Interestingly enough, there were major relocations in that area during the early 1970s.
I'm guessing that's churned up ice in that picture? The writing appears to say "Breaking up on the Missouri River"
Where did the Missouri River go in picture #1?
Geoff, pic #4 is not of this bridge. Here is the link for the correct page:
Not sure how this was never posted here, but today is the last day for comments to the US Coast Guard regarding this bridge:
The engineering company I work for is completing an inspection inventory on minor structures in McKenzie County. We have identified 5 other bridges with spans all under 20' that have recycled truss verticals as beams similar to this bridge.
This article claims that one span of this (continuous) truss is supposedly going to be moved. Paul Silbernagel will move the southern span of the bridge on his ranch east of Linton to cross Beaver Creek in south central North Dakota.
Newly digitized bridge historical bridge report containing numerous original drawings of this bridge: https://archive.org/details/gri_33125016395622
Changing an alignment affects culverts, signal posts, etc, as well as non-railroad infrastructure such as sewer lines, power lines, etc. When drawing up plans for something like this every detail must be included. Each has a cost.
The cost of a new alignment is weighed against the cost of removing the old bridge plus any lost traffic while the line is closed.
It would impact 500 structures? That sure doesn't sound reasonable to me.
Given the already tight radius on the East end, I don't see why the curve on the West end couldn't be tightened somewhat to place the new alignment somewhat North of the existing bridge, and then rejoin the existing track East of the bridge. I'd think that could be done without impacting *any* structures.
Or am I missing something?
Aug. 19, 2019
"BNSF is telling the people of Bismarck, N.D., that if they want this baby they are going to have to take care of it for the rest of its life.
A 136-year-old rail bridge that spans across the Missouri River is at the center of controversy. A group of citizens wants it restored and converted to a pedestrian/bike bridge, but BNSF would rather demolish the structure and put a new one in its place.
A study done by North Dakota State University landscape architecture professors says the converted bridge route can be done, but it will cost $6.9 million. However, BNSF is claiming other costs associated with the bridge preservation. The Class 1 says leaving the existing bridge where it is and building a new one would impact about 500 structures and cost another $8 million in mitigation measures. Then there is any upkeep moving forward. Friends of the Rail Bridge, a group in favor of keeping the old bridge, has no funds tied up for the project, but did use a $10,000 grant on the feasibility study.
A new rail bridge is still on the horizon, it is just a question of alignment. BNSF wants to demolish the 136-year-old and build a new rail bridge, which will require permits from the U.S. Coast Guard.
BNSF also says a pedestrian bridge so close to an active railroad bridge (30 ft) is cause for concern with the threat of derailments or debris falling from trains. The bridge also sits on shallow foundations and is non-redundant, meaning if one part of the bridge fails the entire span collapses.
BNSF claims it filed its concerns with the authors of the feasibility study, but those concerns were not addressed."
Yes, you can certainly make it a blog. The three photos are the best we have.
Yes, it would appear that a truss bridge somewhere in the vicinity died before this slab was built...
Given the build date, this is an ingenious use of old parts when new stuff couldn't exactly be built due to the war effort.
This is most certainly a reuse of former bridge beams. Note the unused angle and empty rivet holes, and gaps in the lacing pattern near end of some beams. They are most likely vertical members from a truss bridge. The only mystery here is where they came from.
That is unusual. I can't see the lacing providing much benefit here, and it costs a significant amount.
I'd be very surprised if it was anything other than reuse.
Do you have any Pictures of them? It would be nice to see them here. I can also write a mystery Bridge article for my blog if you would like?
Hi, Have you seen the use of lattice stringers on a timber bridge before? Could they have been reused from a former structure?
I wouldn't be so sure about GPS systems getting updated to show this road as closed.
I've been studying North Dakota bridges this weekend, and I'm finding a bunch of bridges that were removed and not replaced years ago. These continue to be shown as open by Google as well as the Census Bureau's TIGER dataset (the TIGER data is what powers the "What's Here" tool when editing bridges).
Rural areas just don't get a lot of attention for these things.
In north Iowa, minimum maintenance roads don't have houses or farms along them, so they don't get plowed in winter or graded in the spring, or at least not as a priority.
Even with insurance money, I don't see major money being spent to replace this bridge, they'll probably just close the road.
Same way Gilliece bridge was lost. A shame.
The GPS software will be updated now - for a closed road.
I don't know to what extent GPS has replaced oral or written directions for crews but I suppose it is the main source for routing these days.
I know too little about where GPS and mapping apps get their information. Any GIS pros able to comment on the possibility of incorporating limited load roads into navigation programs?
What's frustrating is that this driver somehow managed to find the only historic bridge on Goose River for a long distance in either direction.
What's also frustrating is that the next bridge upstream is a 1996 UCEB with no posted weight limit on a much better road.
What's also frustrating is that this bridge is located on a road clearly signed as a Minimum Maintenance Road (see Street View on the west end).
What's also frustrating is that this road is only 0.15 miles shorter than the upstream road, but that was apparently just enough to make a GPS device stupidly route the driver this way despite being a Minimum Maintenance Road.
What's also frustrating is that this road doesn't serve any houses or buildings, and carries very little traffic. But that probably won't stop local officials from spending megabucks on a replacement.
I wish it were so simple. It's a loss for the MOB company. You have to factor in either their satisfaction or opposition. If their workers are in a union there is another source of opposition. First part of the solution is listing stakeholders, necessary criteria, and constraints. It varies depending on the particular bridge but there are some that generally apply. The solution needs to be a win for everyone or it will have opposition.
I know from weighing at the elevator, my truck was always overweight. It was important to get the maximum amount carried on each trip to town. It's a business where once the harvest is ready you can't waste time. The stuff up north will be ready in another day or two and if you're not ready the rain may come. It's not a salary job--you only get paid if you cut an acre. The equipment is expensive, the notes come due regardless. I'm not justifying recklessness but there is a lot of pressure to move without delay. The truck drivers may be the youngest and least experienced workers.
A small improvement can be had by putting warning signs far enough out that there is a way to avoid getting into a situation that involves backing a truck. Permanent "truck route" signage would help.
This particular incident was pretty careless. The cutters and the farmer both lost and no doubt regret this as much as anyone.
The solution is easy. Take every situation where a Continental Bridge Company MOB bridge was originally planned to be used on a trail. Use a historic bridge instead. Build new bridge for trucks on highway. Done. Everyone is happy.
The win-win scenario is so obvious yet it is a constant fight to try to get it to happen.
As for the actual situation here, even if they are in a hurry to deliver goods, what sane person drives a truck of that size and thinks they can safely drive on a bridge like this? You shouldn't need to be an engineer to figure this out even if you don't know how to read (the weight limit sign).
This event highlights the problem faced by people hoping to preserve century old parts of our transportation infrastructure.
I drove a truck during wheat harvest many years ago. I understand the pressure to move from the field to the elevator with minimum delay. Add to this travel in unfamiliar territory, in my day guided by verbal directions and sketched maps, these days inadequate GPS routing.
Rural roads are there to serve the needs of local growers. Their property taxes pay for the upkeep of the roads and bridges. We can't insist that they pay for infrastructure that does not meet their needs.
This would make an interesting problem for a senior design class. Save the bridges in a way that meets with the approval of the local people paying the taxes for the roads.
it's about the beans.
Maybe there are a lot of vegans who read GQ.
Cowboys love 'em too.
I can't decide if it's quippy or condescending...
I have a headache after reading the article.
The bridge has, to the befuddlement of many, made it to GQ
Short clip on YouTube showing the beautifully restored Brickmine Bridge:
Could be repaired if they are willing to take the insurance money and send the trusses to the right person like Nels up in Michigan.
The post states that the truck weighed 86,750 (I'd expect overweight without a permit anywhere, not just on this bridge, but I don't know the ND standards) on a bridge rated for 14 tons/28,000.
The citation was $11,400. That seems awfully low for causing close to $1M damage (based on replacement cost) by being over 3 times the allowed weight.
Unfortunately, this historic pony truss was destroyed by a trucker that tried to cross it with over 3 times the posted weight. The bridge is listed on the National Register.
National Trust for Historic Preservation has named this bridge on its "11 Most Endangered Historic Places for 2019". You can see the list, a photo of the bridge, and a link to a petition to save the bridge, at https://savingplaces.org/stories/11-most-endangered-historic...
This is a great honor for those working to preserve this landmark bridge, as they continue to fight to save it.
I'm working on this bridge right now it great to be part of an awesome project like this
I'm working on this bridge right now it great to be part of an awesome project like this
With an ADT of 10 it makes sense to spend money on a new bridge... That will NEVER pay for itself!
Full sarcasm intended.
Looking at the picture, it’s clearly a reused truss from somewhere. The portals seem to indicate a date earlier than the 1920s build date. To me, it almost looks like some of the reused Santa Fe trusses in Missouri and Kansas, indicating it could have been a railroad span
On a side note, my dad worked construction and helped work on 12th Avenue when they replaced the bridge. Small world, isn’t it?
TIL--gephyrophobic - having a profound fear of bridges
The link mentions crossing at the roundhouse, the remains of which are still visible. The tracks on the east side are the older of the two, so the truss was probably over the east set of tracks.
I believe this is a link to more info about this bridge.
Crossed the tracks between 20th and 23rd streets, so it must have crossed the set of tracks just west of Dakota Drive.
Phrase of the day: "Harrowing ride" 8^)
Some optimistic news regarding the future of this bridge:
A petition has been created to save the bridge:
Thanks Patrick, didn't think it was this bridge. Only a couple other crossings in Haley
Also worth noting, the Northern Pacific bridge book lists this structure as having been built in 1960. Undoubtedly a relocated bridge.
Bridge was already listed, just needed name and other info added.
Just found this one. What a nice surprise!
Historic Brickmine Bridge in Cavalier County undergoing restoration
March 31, 2017 · · 0
The historic Brickmine Bridge located in the northeast corner of Cavalier County along a township road in Fremont Township is undergoing some needed restoration courtesy of the State Historical Society of North Dakota and the North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT).
By Melissa Anderson
Lorna Meidinger, Architectural Historian with the State Historical Society, explained that what makes the Brickmine Bridge unique in North Dakota is the type of bridge it is.
“The Brickmine Bridge is a riveted Warren Through truss bridge and that is not a common type in North Dakota so it is a rare example,” Meidinger said.
A Warren truss bridge is a bridge that is a relatively light but strong and economical to build. It was ideal for a rural area such as Cavalier County in the early 1900s and its primary users during that time, Mayo Brick and Tile Co., known locally as just “the Brickmine”.
“The connection to the old Brickmine provides a rich context for why the bridge was built,” Meidinger explained.
Truss bridges were used and popular during the era because they are a very rigid structure that transfers the load from a single point to a much wider area. While there is no exact build date for the bridge, it was contracted by the Fargo Bridge and Iron Company in April of 1905 to be built for a whopping $4,220. In today’s dollars, the cost of building this specific bridge is over $114,000. The bridge, according to Cavalier County Republican archives, was completed in early 1906.
“North Dakota is losing its historic bridges as they age and are replaced by new structures. When we (the NDDOT) have the opportunity to partner with a local agency (like a city or county) and rehabilitate an historic bridge, we explore the possibility of rehabilitating the historic bridge so it can continue to serve its transportation role,” Robert Christensen, Cultural Resource Section Leader at NDDOT, said.
The NDDOT selected the Brickmine Bridge as a candidate for restoration based on five criteria: local agency interests in rehabilitating the historic bridge, the bridge can remain in service in a transportation role, rehabilitate historic bridges from different regions in the state, bridge was a good candidate structurally (not too damaged, rusted, etc.), and the NDDOT can rehabilitate the bridge and not adversely impact its historic nature.
The NDDOT periodically reviews good candidate bridges for their Historic Bridge Rehabilitation Program. While they do not have a regular schedule for such projects, they are initiated when there is a good candidate structure, local support for the project, and funding to complete the project.
“Currently we have this project and another historic bridge rehabilitation project in Velva City Park,” Christensen stated.
While the restoration of the Brickmine Bridge is a NDDOT initiated and funded project, the NDDOT and the State Historical Society are used to partnering on projects, as they do so on many roadway and bridge projects throughout the year.
“When an opportunity to work together on these special projects occurs, we enjoy partnering and developing win-win solutions,” Christensen said, ”By rehabilitating the bridge, it will retain its historic integrity and will remain in service for many decades.”
The NDDOT began working with Cavalier County on planning the restoration project in 2015. Over the next few years, the bridge was reviewed by the NDDOT and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), a sub-office within the State Historical Society that works with historic preservation and the applicable state and federal preservation laws. The office puts projects through what is called the Section 106 review process [Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act]. The SHPO reviews proposals for projects to determine the effect on historic resources. For this particular project, the goal is to restore the bridge and maintain a “No Adverse Effect” determination for the bridge.
“Basically, a project is proposed, and we evaluate the effect on a historic property,” Meidinger explained.
In this case, engineers looked at structural needs and then both NDDOT and SHPO looked at all the options for things that need replaced rather than being repaired. SHPO use the Secretary of Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation to evaluate the proposed work and then work with the lead agency to find the best path for completing the project and protecting the historic property.
“We have worked closely with the State Historical Society of North Dakota, both with their compliance officer and their architectural historian, to ensure we will preserve the bridge’s historical integrity,” Christensen said.
Meidinger and Christensen explained that what is possible to be repaired will be repaired and parts that need replacing will be replaced either in-kind or with a sensitive design and materials to minimize the loss of historic integrity of the bridge.
“The engineers look at each piece of the bridge to make determinations of repair or replacement. Replacement in-kind is acceptable when repair is not possible but if something needs to change for the new part, then we go over available options to make the best choice. There will also be signage to talk about the historic bridge,” Meidinger said.
“We are planning to remove the bridge from its foundation, sandblast it and repair any damaged members in the truss, repaint the truss, replace the foundation with new piers and abutments, and reset the bridge on the new foundation,” Christensen explained.
Projects of this undertaking are becoming more unlikely as Christensen explained that it is pretty rare to find a really good candidate bridge for historic preservation.
“Many bridges are replaced with new structures because they are too narrow, not enough vertical clearance, or are not strong enough to accommodate modern traffic such as semis, farm equipment and school busses,” Christensen said.
More often old bridges are simply replaced with box culverts or stringer bridges. Christensen noted that many historic bridges are damaged to such an extent that it is difficult or impossible to repair them and still have them retain their historic integrity.
“We are always on the lookout for good candidates for our Historic Bridge Rehabilitation Program,” Christensen stated.
Funding for these types of projects come from the NDDOT by means of federal and state funds. Local public agency will be responsible for the approach roadways and maintenance of the restored structure. In the meantime, the restoration process has been put in the hands of Industrial Builders, Inc. from West Fargo. The company, which started in 1953, has a long history of working on projects such as this.
“Industrial Builders, Inc. has a lot of experience building structures that people care about, and we have experience with steel bridge restoration and the major aspects of this job interested us because they included a lot of the components on jobs we’ve built successfully in the past,” Brittany Diederich, Assistant Project Manager at Industrial Builders, Inc., said.
“Our company takes a lot of pride in successfully completed projects, and we believe that once this one is done, it will be very satisfying to see the bridge restored for both us and the community,” Diederich added.
The restoration project is already underway, with the bridge being lifted by crane from its place on the Pembina River to a nearby field where the work on the structure will be completed. A lot of work has already been done to the base of the bridge.
“The spring flood is occurring right now so we suspended construction; prior to the flood, we had nearly completed pile driving operations. We intend to re-mobilize to the site in late April/early May, dependent on conditions, to resume and complete the project,” Diederich stated.
As Industrial Builders, Inc. began working on the bridge, they made special efforts to insure the structure of the bridge remained intact by removing the stringers and deck planks.
“Swinging a fully assembled bridge with a crane is a bit unusual but very cool to see,” Diederich said.
The construction team will be reconstructing/re-painting the bridge in the field and then swinging it back in place. The base will be all new.
“We are replacing pieces as necessary in the superstructure but keeping as much of the historic steel intact though it will be sandblasted and repainted and look much fresher. Coordinating the new parts with the old makes this an interesting project with a lot of moving parts,” Diederich explained.
The construction and rehabilitation of the bridge will continue through the summer and fall with the NDDOT and Industrial Builders projecting the revitalized bridge to be reset and open for traffic by 2018.
This is an extremely interesting bridge due to its 1916 construction date. It was built at a time when riveted connections had long since replaced pinned connections. It was also built by an obscure company. Hopefully the state of North Dakota is aware of the significance of this one and it gets preserved.
This bridge is currently closed to traffic, due to serious deck deterioration (including two large holes near the west end). We did a deck delamination survey of the bridge in late April. Polk (MN) and Traill (ND) counties are trying to decide whether to repair the deck, replace the deck or replace the bridge.
Is this bridge still available
I think this guy is related to the one who took out the freshly restored covered bridge in PA. As I've known some very intelligent people that drove trucks, I'm fighting the strong urge to generalize.
Oversize load on bridge
Bridge does not carry I-94, but carries Buisness I-94/US-10, the main road in Fargo (I-94 is NOT the main east/west route for traffic). Have changed as such
is this bridge for sale? thanks steve
Two truss bridges are used by the trolley. The trolley site has some inconsistent information calling into question the date of this rail line, and the original location and build dates of the bridges.
Is that your crane in the photo, Steve?
please note i will pay for this bridge and take down at no charge to you thanks steve. ps have crain
The bridge here was actually done in four sections. Two Minnesota approaches in 2009 and 2010, then the ND approaches in 2011 and 2013. I doubt the girders are next. They aren't particularly old, and I believe they were strengthened not too long ago.
This bridge is in the process of being replaced. Last year the Moorhead portion of the trestle was replaced with steel and concrete trestle. The Fargo portion is being replaced this year and the main spans will most likely go after that. More information here: http://www.wday.com/event/article/id/86338/group/News/
Hard to believe as it may be in North Dakota, this bridge may be spared demolition and given the preservation it deserves. http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/571190/...
Where's the bridge....?
With the completion of the newer, "built to withstand 100 year floods" bridge in October 2010 time was ticking on the fate of the old Drayton Bridge ... ticking in that on February 22, 2011 NDDOT decided to throw a party and blow it to smithereens ... Smithereens, North Dakota.
Can really see it in picture 5.
does anyone else notice some damage on one of the endposts?
Yeah...... I won't shed a tear over a MOB!
I just hope nobody was hurt.
Here is a photo of this bridge during the massive floods. The bridge is in the distance. Another truss bridge in town is visible closer to the photographer. http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndguard/5873910530/in/photostre...
Another photo of the bridge during floods here:
And finally, the historic bridge stands tall during the floods, while a feeble modern "Con-Tech" style MOB (Mail Order Bridge) succumbs to the effects of the flood. This modern bridge actually obstructed floodwaters and presented such a hazard that it was removed during the flooding.
Here is a photo of this bridge during the massive flooding:
The river this bridge crosses is more commonly known as the Souris River (it sometimes is called the Mouse River in the U.S.) and is the river that is in the news for its unprecedented flooding. Unfortunately, that might well spell the end for a bridge like this.
By the way, the 1940 date is clearly incorrect, this seems to be a ca 1905 bridge. I wonder if this bridge was relocated in that year.
Beautiful restoration of this span..... But I've said it before and I'll say it again....... PLEASE,PLEASE,PLEASE mount the height limit bars independently and placed back several hundred feet from the portals......And NOT attached to the bridge!
I know, I know......being nit-picky!
This bridge was removed in 2009 during a drain board project and replaced with a culvert.
This bridge is currently closed to the public. The bridge was closed due to abutment problems. The bridge was damaged in the flood of 2009 and fell into the Elm river. The concrete deck was removed and the bridge was lifted by crane out of the river channel and is being staged on the closed roadway until a structural analysis can be conducted by the engineering firm and the bridge will be put up for adoption, after one year if not adopted the bridge shall be removed and salvaged.
This bridge was replaced in 2009 using federal dollars under the NDDOT and Traill County and MNDOT and Norman County. The new bridge was constructed by Swingen Construction of Grand Forks ND. This bridge is on Traill County highway 13 and connects to Norman County highway 3.
This bridge is open to the public.
This bridge was closed to the public. The bridge was removed and replaced with a culvert. The bridge site is on a township gravel road.
This bridge has gone through a rehab and was restored using historical funds and federal dollars. This bridge is back and open to the public. But the bridge has been posted to a 7 ton maximum and is restricted from trucks and large vehicles. The height of the bridge has been reduced to help keep the heavy equipment off the bridge. There will be a official ribbon cutting and historical ceremony sometime this summer. Thanks.
Yup, it's me, Mr. Useless Information himself. I've been in winter hibernation, the bridges up here are still buried in snowplow dropoff (like my mailbox) but quadrants are starting to show up again. (So did my mailbox this past week.) My shutter finger is itchin' to go bridge hunting again soon!
Is it really you?....Long time no comment......
Yeah.......I honestly did know that MTH were British.....but hey it sounded good at the time!
I didn't know any of that stuff though.....you are an absolute treasure trove of information! :)
Considering that Mott the Hoople was a Brit band, I doubt that connection, however, the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople has the largest collection of manuscripts by P.D.Q. Bach, in fact, more than fourscore of scores.
Prof. Peter Schickele used to broadcast his "Report from Hoople" on the university's radio station, WOOF. His broadcasts included such notable P.D.Q Bach compositions as the Echo Sonata for Two Unfriendly Groups of Instruments, Schleptet in E flat Major, Fugue in C Minor, from the “Toot” Suite for Calliope Four Hands, 1712 Overture, The Short-Tempered Clavier and Grand Serenade for an Awful Lot of Winds & Percussion.
A most valuable a historical location, no doubt.
I remember a band called "Mott the Hoople".......maybe they were from here.......
They have a fine music department there I hear.