This bridge should be considered to have an extremely high degree of historic significance as what may be the last surviving lenticular full deck truss bridge. Although the smaller approach span has collapsed, it appears that most of this span remains in place. A combination of restoration and replication could likely put this approach span back into service. The main span that remains in place appears to have outstanding historic integrity including original built-up fishbelly floor beams. The only significant element missing on the bridge appears to be the original railings.
It is in Campton, none so far from the Plymouth line.
A short walk from Rt 3. I don't believe there is any signage, but there are some well used pullovers on the east side of 3 which are a bit of a landmark, which also suggest it and the Gorge do see frequent visitors.
According to Google, it's in Plymouth, NH, an hour and 24 minutes drive from you.
I am looking for a hidden beautiful bridge for my sis to take yoga shoot photos of me for my portfolio, can you please let me know where this is located? We are in Nottingham, NH
I too would like nothing more than to see this amazing structure restored...and for you to be involved in it!
I'll bet you could replicate those original railings as well!
For those that know me or Know of me I have been involved with inkind restoration of these beautiful structures for quite some time ........This bridge above all deserves to be restored it would be an honor and a dream come true to be involved in the restoration of her....
Posted a reply to the forum under a different heading, just did not want to see this thread expand when the jist of the conversation was only tangentially tied to Livermore.
I'll trip back up to the Gorge in a month or so when the melt is done and river levels drop to normal, and both snap some better photos and check on what has become of the collapsed span.
I have been viewing and commenting on BridgeHunter.com for several years. Let me comment on a few items in response to comments from a couple people below.
1. The top half of the page is the "Bridge Page" I have not included anything against covered bridges in this section. I created an unbiased, fact-based page for the bridge here.
2. The second half of this page is the "Forum Page". This is a place where people are allowed to express comments, including opinions. Many people express views I don't agree with elsewhere on the website, however I understand this is a place for people to have different opinions.
3. I am sorry if I conveyed the idea that I have something against New Hampshire in particular. The problem with covered bridges is nationwide and due to Federal Policy. While New Hampshire's bridges may be town owned and may be preserved due to the decision made by these folks, these folks have made this decision while accepting funds from the Federal Government's National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation Act (15 bridges since 2000). There was never a National Historic Metal Truss Bridge Preservation Act for example. Non-covered bridges receive no funds. They have to beg for Transportation Enhancement Grants, or get funding from mainstream bridge funding which requires them to be on-system, meet modern loading and geometry, and have a sufficiency over 50%.
4. I have never stated that covered bridges should not be posted on BridgeHunter.com. I have never questioned adding covered bridges to BridgeHunter.com. I only merely question the proportion of tax dollars that get spent preserving covered bridges versus other historic bridge types.
I agree with Will's thoughts. There's nothing wrong with preserving the few covered bridges left, in addition to the metal trusses. The covered bridges are direct ancestors of the metal trusses, and still exhibit rare truss configurations that aren't found on any metal truss.
The forum pages are getting cluttered up with the endless diatribes against covered bridges. And there were a couple more yesterday, bashing that very attractive new covered bridge in Ohio.
I took a look at the webmaster's page describing his goals for this site, and covered bridges are included. So if they're acceptable for the site's owner, then including them is no one else's business. Nathan has his own site, which is the appropriate place for his rants.
Thanks for the page Nathan, I am pleased to have had a small contribution on finding this bridge from clear across the country. A very interesting design, I am pleased pictures are beginning to be submitted for this structure.
You're making it hard for me to want to add photographs to this listing, with your having chosen to use it as a vehicle to again post your dislike for wooden bridges, and to do so this time, with false assumptions about my states political structure.
I cannot in good conscience, add photos to the listing and seemingly rubberstamp sentiments I do not agree with, without first speaking my own mind.
I do not understand how you have come to equate a victory for the preservation of a wooden bridge, as one in the loss column for those working to preserve other types, nor can I agree with your oft repeated claim that most wooden through truss bridges fail to retain a large percentage of original material, or that trusses constructed of other materials have a naturally superior service life to one made of wood which sees proper maintenance to its cladding. I've done preservation and maintenance work on many, and have surveyed hundreds in at least ten states and wholeheartedly disagree with both statements.
There is no long existing grand scheme preservation plan here in New Hampshire that has led to what might seem to be a disproportionate number of still existing covered bridges. In truth and in irony it is the political structure which has led both to the preservation of those bridges, and the abandonment of this one. It is our Town Meeting form of Government, that coupled with Yankee thrift. It is the people here, who decide major town expenditures in our every citizen has a say and a vote form of democracy.
With but one exception I can think of, every wooden bridge in the state is Town, not State owned, it was the people in those towns with their yea or nay, at individual Town meetings, not some faceless bureaucrat in the states capitol that chose to keep those bridges in service.
The money which built the Livermore Falls Bridge was in all probability provided to the town by the land raping Lumber Baron who built and owned a number of mills in town including one in the Gorge on the west bank of the river within sight of this bridge, all part of an infrastructure he developed to strip every cent of revenue represented in the last vast stand of timber then left in the state, in the Sandwich Range which stands to the east of town.
With the demise of that mill in the Gorge the primary purpose for the bridge also ceased to exist, and the people would have seen little reason to vote to repeatedly fund reflooring it. Just as in casting a vote to fund repair instead of replacement of a bridge, it is often the pocketbook that drives how the majority decides.
One might look at the other side of that same coin. There was not a decision to fund a replacement either, which is the only reason the truss is there to hope to save.
Are you kidding me...a Lenticular deck truss!!!
What an unbelievably amazing structure...even in it's derelict state!
What an incredible one this would be to restore...as it should be!
Here is a page I have created for the bridge. Please do post additional photos.
I find it extremely disturbing that this lenticular truss bridge, which probably could be argued to be nationally significant, has been allowed to sit abandoned, and one span allowed to collapse. This bridge is as rare as or rarer than any of this state's many preserved covered bridges. It is just as deserving of preservation. Furthermore, this bridge, if restored, would retain a far higher quantity of original bridge material than most covered bridges, since the iron of this bridge does not deteriorate in the way wood does.
However the collapsed span remains and the preservation technology is available to restore even badly damaged collapsed trusses. A full restoration of both spans for pedestrian use as soon as possible is the only acceptable option I see for this bridge.