The road and bridge contractor lobby has to keep up the fear mongering. I'm not sure how accurate this data is because at least 2 of the bridges on the most traveled list are currently being rehabilitated. At least we made a dent with a 8.5% decrease from 2015 to 2016.
Most of the SD bridges in Oklahoma are county (off system) bridges that probably see 30 vehicles a day. If they have a weight limit of less than 15 tons a school bus doesn't cross them. If they do it's on the driver, not the county.
If we really wanted to get rid of the bad county bridges the ridiculous environmental clearance process would be reformed and streamlined. As it is, we are at the mercy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service. They value mussels, beetles, bats, fish and (non-endangered) birds over humans.
OSU - I was being a wise guy, somewhat, because your first post reminded me of an article I saw in ENR 20 oddd years ago. In Orange County CA a hospital under construction was delayed because someone found endangered mosquitoes. It cost millions to build a suitable habitat for the bugs. Since then, whenever I swat a fly I wonder if It was an endangered species.
This was for a replacement to span the channel so the dive team didn't have to come and relocate the mussels and protect some fish no one has ever heard of.
bridgebuster, do you have to give the USFWS specific information about how the contractor will build the bridge (drilling equipment pads, etc) and how long it will take them to build specific components (drilled shafts, columns etc.)?
On the design end, these questions are addressed in the EIS. When the project gets into construction, the owner usually obtains the initial environmental permits for inclusion in the bid documents, then after that the contractor applies and obtains permits.
![[worm]](/data/assets/smilies/worm.gif "[worm] [worm]")