Document generated on 09/26/2021 8:31 a.m.
Ontario History
The “Statistically Average” Early Haliburton Farm A Case Study from the Kennaway Settlement Christopher S. Martinello
Volume 107, Number 2, Fall 2015 Article abstract Haliburton County, now a major cottage and lumbering area, was founded for URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1050634ar the purpose of farming, before the west was officially open for settlement. The DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1050634ar original two settlements were Haliburton Village and Kennaway, now a ghost town. Local census and tax assessment registers for Kennaway can tell us who See table of contents the pioneers were, and exactly what kinds of crops and livestock they tended. This allows us to determine average annual crop yields, livestock numbers, acres of land cleared, and the average family and farm sizes in the region. Publisher(s) From this we can construct a “statistically average” early Haliburton farm and discover with precision what some of Ontario’s last pioneer farms were like. The Ontario Historical Society
ISSN 0030-2953 (print) 2371-4654 (digital)
Explore this journal
Cite this article Martinello, C. S. (2015). The “Statistically Average” Early Haliburton Farm: A Case Study from the Kennaway Settlement. Ontario History, 107(2), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.7202/1050634ar
Copyright © The Ontario Historical Society, 2015 This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/
This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit. Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal, Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to promote and disseminate research. https://www.erudit.org/en/ e “Statistically Average” 1791 Early Haliburton Farm A Case Study from the Kennaway Settlement
by Christopher S. Martinello
Abstract aliburton Coun- Haliburton County, now a major cottage and lumbering area, ty, Ontario, is was founded for the purpose of farming, before the west was of- much more than a cially open for settlement. e original two settlements were Haliburton Village and Kennaway, now a ghost town. Local Hbeautifully forested wilder- census and tax assessment registers for Kennaway can tell us who ness that comes alive every the pioneers were, and exactly what kinds of crops and livestock summer when thousands of they tended. is allows us to determine average annual crop cottagers travel to the area yields, livestock numbers, acres of land cleared, and the average family and farm sizes in the region. From this we can construct a to enjoy the region’s spar- “statistically average” early Haliburton farm and disco er with kling lakes. Unbeknownst precision what some of Ontario’s last pioneer farms were like. to many, the area also has a number of historical secrets Résumé: Le comté d’Haliburton fut fondé dans des buts ag- ricoles avant que l’ouest ne soit o ciellement ouvert à la colo- and surprises. e county nisation. Haliburton et Kennaway furent les villages originels sprawls across hundreds of de ce comté qui est devenu à présent une région de chalets et une square kilometers of the ge- zone forestière. Même si Kennaway est à l’heure actuelle une ological formation known ville fantôme, ses registres de recensement et du prélèvement de as the Canadian Shield taxes peuvent nous montrer qui étaient les premiers pionniers et nous dévoiler ce qu’ils cultivaient et ce qu’ils élevaient. Ces rensei- and, although heavily for- gnements nous permettent de calculer le rendement annuel des ested, its shallow soil covers récoltes, le nombre de têtes de bétail, les acres de terre déboisés, some of the rockiest terrain ainsi que de déterminer la taille d’une famille et d’une ferme typ- in North America. Natu- iques de la région. Grâce à ces informations, il nous est possible de récréer une ferme « statistiquement moyenne » d’Haliburton rally, given the area’s thick de l’époque, et d’in estiguer la nature des dernières fermes pion- forests, ancient rock, and nières ontariennes. varying topography, it sur- prises many people to dis- cover that this region was one of the last tario—that of the pioneer farmer. Hali- outposts of a bygone way of life in On- burton’s pioneer farms have been given
Ontario History / Volume CVII, No. 2 / Autumn 2015
OH autumn 2015.indd 179 08/09/2015 10:21:12 PM 180 ONTARIO HISTORY
extremely little attention in historical lit- ended in 1783. Loyalists rapidly claimed erature, despite the fact that this was one and cleared land in what is now South- of the last areas of Ontario in which pio- ern Ontario. Between 1826 and 1838, neers erected log-cabins and cleared land Ontario’s population doubled, and did so for agriculture. Utilizing the region’s rst yet again by 1861.1 By Confederation in census records (1871) as well as tax as- 1867, the province had about half of all sessment registers that span several dec- the cleared farmland in Canada. e gen- ades of the late nineteenth century, this eral belief was that Ontario needed im- paper will present a snapshot of pioneer migration to drive economic prosperity. life. From this, we can move from general However, the amount of unclaimed land discussions of pioneer farming to remark- in Southern Ontario that was suitable for ably detailed evaluations of agricultural farming was running out, and the vast ex- patterns in this fringe environment and panse of the Prairies was still controlled answer such questions as what kinds of by the Hudson’s Bay Company. So the crops and livestock the settlers raised and only land available for new immigrants exactly how long it took the settlers to to pioneer was the Haliburton frontier. chop their farms out of the ancient forest A second reason that settlers attempt- and for those farms to reach their maxi- ed to farm on the Canadian Shield relates mum extents. Finally, this information to the area’s abundant lumber camps. can clearly show us how pioneer farming Since freight costs to ship foodstu s to in this region di ered from agriculture in these isolated camps were naturally high, the atter, more fertile areas of the prov- proponents of settlement believed that ince south of the Shield. Accordingly, it new farms would put food and fodder brings into strong focus a comprehensive within easy reach of the camps, and that picture of the e orts made by some of the settlers would bene t from having Ontario’s last pioneer settlers. a readily available market for their pro- Many would ask why people at- duce. is arrangement was problematic, tempted to establish pioneer settlements however. Once the stock of available on the rocky Canadian Shield, an area timber was depleted, the camps moved so inhospitable to farming. One reason on, leaving the settlers as isolated as the is that, between 1780 and 1860, Upper camps were, and without local demand Canada experienced a population boom, for their goods.2 due in no small part to the in ux of the A third reason that Haliburton was United Empire Loyalists, Americans dis- opened up to pioneer farming was that, enchanted with the direction their coun- aside from the population boom, poten- try took aer the Revolutionary War tial settlers from outside Canada wanted
1 R.L. Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977), 289, and M. J. Troughton, Canadian Agriculture (Budapest, Hungary: Akademiai Kiado, 1982), 31. 2 J.W. Maxwell, “Notes on Land Use and Landscape Evaluation in a Fringe Area of the Canadian Shield,” Geographical Bulletin, 8:2 (1966), 144.
OH autumn 2015.indd 180 08/09/2015 10:21:14 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 181
Figure 1: e Hon. Philip Michael Matthew Scott VanKoughnet, Commissioner of Crown Lands om 1858 to 1862. (Library and Archives Canada) cheap land. Immigrants eeing the pota- to famine in Ireland and general poverty across the British Isles, pushed the On- tario government to establish new settle- ments. Many Britons believed that there were “vast tracts” of unsettled land in Ontario, but remained ignorant of their true quality.3 Bending to this pressure in the 1840s, the Ontario Legislature set up a Select Committee for the Manage- ment of Public Lands, which began to plan how to open up the Haliburton- Muskoka region to new pioneers. e plan coalesced in 1846, under the lead- ership of the Hon. P. VanKoughnet, the Commissioner of Crown Lands.4 He au- thorized a settlement policy for the Hali- burton-Muskoka area that introduced land grants along colonization roads yet to be built. is, he thought, would ally true at the time, it presupposed that solve at least two problems: the mount- farming could be successfully done in the ing pressure for new land, and the grow- rocky, sparsely soiled region. ing need to feed the many lumber camps is initiative opened an inherently already operating in the northern forests. inhospitable area to agriculture, helping He went on to declare the region, “the to predetermine its eventual failure. On most advantageous for colonization that some level, VanKoughnet may have been the government had at its disposal.”5 is aware of the inferior potential of the re- claim, tenuous as it was, was made and gion as farmland. e Land Act of 1841 then circulated without the consent of allowed for allotments of fewer than y the select committee that had worked on acres along future colonization roads to the issue. While it may have been factu- be sold to settlers6 but, in 1846, the de-
3 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 289. 4 Canada, Library of Parliament collection, “Hon. Philip Michael VanKoughnet,” 1856–1862, uebec, photograph by William Ellisson, Library and Archives Canada, accession number 1951– 322, location number 50097, reproduction copy number C-008366 (copy negative number). 5 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 290; emphasis mine. 6 Ibid., 292.
OH autumn 2015.indd 181 08/09/2015 10:21:15 PM 182 ONTARIO HISTORY
Figure 2: e Hon. William McDougall, Commissioner of Crown Lands om 1862-1864. (LAC)
area’s agricultural potential. One private surveyor assessed the proposed uebec- Lake Huron Railroad, and surveyed the land north of where the Opeongo Colo- nization Road would be. He reported that there was “scarcely any [good soil] in the area he examined.”7 He, at least, had no reason to present a picture that was prettier than the reality. Finally, even some government surveyors had to ad- mit that in some of the townships “there was not enough soil to hold their [prop- erty boundary] stakes, and that in others there was nothing but sand.”8 Clearly, someone of in uence was needed to dis- courage agricultural expansion in the Ca- nadian Shield region. Such an individual came in the guise of yet another Com- cision was made to distribute it through missioner of Crown Lands. free grants. is suggests that legislators e Hon. William McDougall, Com- knew the land had limited agricultural missioner of Crown Land from 1862 to potential but were willing to give it away 1864 (see gure 2),9 attempted to turn in order to open up the area, thus pro- the tide of farming settlement away from moting it as the “best area available.” the Haliburton area, but he was perhaps Clearly, there is con icting evidence too late. In his rst report, he acknowl- about how well the government truly edged that Ontario’s Canadian Shield understood the Haliburton-Muskoka frontier was unsuitable for settlement. region or believed in its potential as He also began to outline which speci c farmland. Regardless, in 1854 the gov- areas should be closed to such expansion, ernment gave the nod to plans to build even saying in a speech to the Assembly a grid of colonization roads through it, that there was “no point in bringing in despite pessimistic reports both private paupers at the government’s expense, and as well as government surveyors of the watching over them and even feeding 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Henry J. Morgan collection, “Hon. W. MacDougal,” ca. 1867–1876, Montreal, photograph by William Notman, Library and Archives Canada, accession number 1984–170, location number 5197, nding aid FA-194 MSTRNOT.
OH autumn 2015.indd 182 08/09/2015 10:21:16 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 183
them aerwards.”10 Various legislators the Ontario government implemented began to support McDougall’s policy. In the Free Grants and Homesteads Act of 1864, a select committee of the legislature 1868.12 It allowed for the expansion of not only agreed but also argued in favour the original colonization roads in 1868 of new colonization roads being built in and 1869, with shorter branch roads areas that were proven to be hospitable to built to access the new settlements in the farming. e following year, yet another northern townships. Following these ini- select committee noticed that politicians’ tiatives, the government had the future interest in the Haliburton area had been Haliburton County surveyed, laying out dropped like a hot stone “in view of the townships in the customary rectangular general expectation that a very large area lot and concession pattern that was used of fertile land... is shortly to be placed so successfully in Southern Ontario. e under the control and supervision of the founding of Haliburton County was un- Canadian Legislature.”11 is great gi derway, and at its root was pioneer farm- of land was, of course, the Hudson’s Bay ing. Company lands in the Northwest, which In the 1860s, a British company would eventually be ocially opened up known as the Canadian Land and Emi- for settlement, but this would come too gration Company was formed in Lon- late for the initial settlers of Haliburton don, and it decided to try to make a in the 1850s and 1860s. pro t by purchasing nine of the new Unfortunately, McDougall’s wis- townships and selling lots to potential dom and caution were not maintained pioneer settlers for $1.50 per acre.13 e by later policy-makers, thus swinging the company began by establishing two set- pendulum back towards support for pio- tlements in its townships: Haliburton neering on the Canadian Shield just be- Village in Dysart Township in the west fore 1880. Even though the birth of the of the region, and Kennaway in Harcourt Western provinces was on the horizon, Township in the east.14 A rough coloni-
10 Florence B. Murray, Muskoka and Haliburton, 1615–1875 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963), and Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 298. 11 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 298. 12 J.H. Richards, “Land Use and Settlement Patterns on the Fringe of the Shield in Southern Ontario,” vol. 1 (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1954), 99. 13 Valerie Smith, Harcourt’s Sons & Daughters (Haliburton: Self-published, 2003), 10. 14 e terms “early Haliburton” and “eastern Haliburton” will be used here to indicate an emphasis on either the time period or the location. Since Haliburton County was generally settled in the 1860s and 1870s, I use “early Haliburton” when I want to be clear that the farms being discussed are from the initial settlement period (to contrast with those from later on, some of which still exist today). “Eastern Halibur- ton” and “Harcourt” emphasize place. Since “Haliburton” refers to the entire county, and there were at rst two settlements (Haliburton Village in Dysart Township in the west of the county and Kennaway in Harcourt Township in the east), sometimes I alternate between these place names. Haliburton County, as well as the village itself, are named aer Chief Justice omas Chandler Haliburton, the rst chair of the Canadian Land and Emigration Company. Kennaway Village is named aer John H. Kennaway, who was the second to hold the position of company chair.
OH autumn 2015.indd 183 08/09/2015 10:21:16 PM 184 ONTARIO HISTORY
zation road called the Kennaway Road, farming in Haliburton. built in 1872, initially connected these two original pioneer hamlets.15 In later Nineteenth-Century Wheat years, settlers founded new villages near- Farming in Ontario by, and some still exist, such as Tory Hill, lthough Haliburton County, in- Wilberforce, and Harcourt, while oth- Acluding the Kennaway settlement, ers were eventually abandoned and have was home to some of Ontario’s last set- since disappeared, such as Cheddar, Deer tlers, their farming e orts have much to Lake, and Essonville. By the 1940s, one of tell us about how they modi ed typical the original two settlements, Kennaway, Southern Ontario agricultural practices had also collapsed. When the Kennaway to t the unique environment of the Ca- schoolhouse (originally opened in 1870) nadian Shield. In order to discern what closed in 1950 or 1952, it was servicing a study of an early Haliburton farm can children from only two families.16 tell us about farming patterns in the re- Why did Kennaway and many other gion, it is important to understand the settlements collapse? In short, aer years larger context of agriculture throughout of extremely dicult labour trying to Ontario, and to grasp the overall pattern coax crops out of the easily exhausted of pioneer farming in the later part of the soils of the Canadian Shield, the settlers nineteenth century. Several important were forced either to give up their farm- sources document how pioneer farms ing and turn to di erent pursuits more south of the Canadian Shield tended to suited to the area (such as logging), or to progress from original woodlots to pro- move away if they wanted to continue to ductive elds, and the particular types farm successfully. Aer 1870, Canada of- of crops that their settlers grew in the cially opened up Manitoba for pioneer- rst years of a farm’s existence. Edwin ing and, as Nila Reynolds states, “…hard- Guillet, for example, notes that in early ly a family escaped the fever which seized settlements, even as close to Haliburton whole settlements... ere is hardly a as Peterborough, pioneers usually grew Haliburton County family established potatoes and wheat together.18 ese since the nineteenth century which has two cultigens seem to have dominated not contributed at least one member to dinner tables for decades before the the wining of the west.”17 e inaugura- northern townships were settled, as tion of the fertile prairie provinces sig- evidenced in 1833 by surveyor Nichol naled the beginning of the end of pioneer Baird, whose
15 Leopolda and Lobkowicz Dobrzensky, Fragments of a Dream: Pioneering in Dysart Township and Haliburton Village (Haliburton: Municipality of Dysart, 1985), 206. 16 Christopher S. Martinello, Kennaway: e History and Archaeology of a Haliburton Ghost Town (London: Self-published, 2010), 573, and Smith, Harcourt’s Sons & Daughters, 29. 17 Nila Reynolds, In Quest of Yesterday (Minden: e Provisional County of Haliburton, 1973), 127. 18 Edwin C. Guillet, Pioneer Settlements (Toronto: e Ontario Publishing Company, Co., Ltd., 1947), 45.
OH autumn 2015.indd 184 08/09/2015 10:21:17 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 185
party called for dinner at a farmhouse near James Beaven, who published an account Rice Lake. A large pot of potatoes was boiled of his travels to Upper Canada, described and emptied on the table, and some salt a settler in the second year of working the placed nearby. Joseph Pickering... found that land: He ensured that “a crop of grain or the typical meal he could get at a farmhouse 22 was bread or cake, and butter and pota- Indian corn cover[ed] the ground,” or toes...”19 “he might sow wheat where the potatoes and Indian corn had been the rst... Pref- Even when settlement did reach the erably he chopped and logged enough borders of Haliburton, settlers clearly each year to be able to harrow wheat into expected that wheat would be the sta- four or ve acres of new land, and le ple crop. e trend was that as soon as the older clearings in hay or pasture...”.23 a settler ploughed the land, a grist mill Beaven then described the typical farm followed: “In 1861 Giles Stone became that had advanced to yet another phase: the rst white settler within the present “ e crops of grain and corn extend on con nes of Burleigh Township, and two all sides.”24 Since most settlers had strong years later John Goulbourne erected a 20 intentions of becoming predominantly grist-mill on Eel’s Creek...” wheat farmers, it should come as no If wheat and potatoes were the pio- surprise that in Upper Canada, wheat neer farmers’ staple crops south of the Ca- was nearly universally grown within the nadian Shield, clearly wheat was meant rst six decades of initial settlement, and to take precedence over the root crops alone accounted for more than 30 per upon which they seemed to have relied cent of the land under crop in the 1850s most heavily during their rst year on the and 1860s.25 land. Jones describes the early evolution A brief examination of farming of crop types for the typical Ontario pio- trends from a sample of counties through- neer farmer: out the province will further re ne our When he had the trees removed from a few understanding of the predominance of acres, the backwoodsman planted his rst wheat farming in new settlements south crop... he cut holes in the turf for his pota- toes... en, in the autumn, to obtain a little of the Canadian Shield, and how the ex- cash for tea and other necessaries, he would ample of Haliburton and the Shield set- sow some wheat broadcast on the unstirred tlements did not conform to this pattern. ground...21 Victoria County, for example, lies south
19 Edwin C. Guillet, Pioneer Life (Toronto: e Ontario Publishing Company, Co., Ltd., 1938), 62. 20 Guillet, Pioneer Settlements, 62. 21 Jones, History of Agriculture, 72–73. 22 Jones quoting James Beaven, Recreations of a Long Vacation, or a Visit to Indian Missions in Upper Canada (Toronto: H. and W. Rowsell, 1846), 65–67. 23 Ibid., 73; emphasis mine. 24 Ibid., 65–67. 25 Troughton, Canadian Agriculture, 109.
OH autumn 2015.indd 185 08/09/2015 10:21:17 PM 186 ONTARIO HISTORY
of Haliburton-Muskoka, but it does not crop returns painted a similar picture, straddle the Shield itself, and there, bush- with wheat as its most abundant crop by els of wheat topped the list of farm prod- the 1850s, though it fell to third place by ucts grown in the 1870s, followed by the 1870s behind oats and corn.31 oats, peas, barley, corn, and rye.26 In the e overall primacy of wheat as a sta- same period in Huron County, hugging ple crop in Ontario townships south of the east shore of the lake for which it is the Canadian Shield, therefore, has long named, oats and turnips only surpassed been established. To compare this picture wheat production.27 In Wellington re- with the patterns on the Shield during gion, north and east of Waterloo, “the the late 1800s requires an investigation emigrants cut down the trees, cleared into what an average farm in an area like the land and planted their potatoes, and Haliburton was producing around the sowed their wheat between the blackened same time. To this e ect, a study of an av- stumps.” 28 In Grey County on Geor- erage Haliburton farm will successfully gian Bay, formally established in 1852, provide us with an unprecedented view wheat by far dominated the agricultural into the realities of how farming on the production with 121,379 bushels, as re- Canadian Shield was dramatically diver- ported by the 1851 census, almost dou- gent from that of pioneer farming south bling the number of bushels of the sec- of that rocky landmass. ond most-produced crop, which was oats at 70,875 bushels. Peas, barley, and corn Early Farming in Haliburton followed.29 Bordering Grey County to y the early twentieth century, pioneer the east, Simcoe County’s wheat produc- Bfarming was largely given up in Hali- tion similarly topped the list, with both burton, but the topic of Haliburton pio- spring and fall wheat outputs combining neer farms has been given relatively little to reach 974,141 bushels. Oats, pota- attention in historical literature. Perhaps toes, and turnips rounded out Simcoe’s this is because people assume that the top crops by the 1870s.30 Representing general story of pioneer farming is well Southwestern Ontario, Kent County’s known, or that so little information ex-
26 Edward C. Phelps, ed., Belden’s Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Victoria, Ontario 1881 (Ancaster, ON: Alexander Publishing, 2000), 6. 27 H. Belden & Co., Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Huron, Ontario (Toronto: H. Belden & Co., 1879), 7. 28 Ross Cumming, Historical Atlas of the County of Wellington, Ontario (Toronto: Historical Atlas Publishing Co., 1906). 29 H. Belden & Co., Illustrated Historical Atlas of the Counties of Grey and Bruce, Ont. (Toronto: H. Belden & Co., 1880). 30 H. Belden & Co. Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Simcoe, Ont. (Toronto: H. Belden & Co., 1881), 7. 31 H. Belden & Co. Illustrated Historical Atlas of the Counties of Essex and Kent (Toronto: H. Belden & Co., 1881), 51.
OH autumn 2015.indd 186 08/09/2015 10:21:17 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 187
ists about the Haliburton farms that Graph we cannot easily discern what they were really like, let alone how they may have compared to pioneer farms in other areas of Ontario. In fact, we can discover a great deal about Hali- burton’s original farms by compiling data from sources that include census records and the county’s tax assess- ment registers. Such a study can help us answer the following questions about farming in the region: (1) Exactly how large (in acres) was To begin, we must turn to the Ca- the average early Haliburton nadianTable census 2: Ages records of Settlers for ComparedHarcourt to for Acres Cleared and Family Sizes (1871) farm? 701871 which records the initial nine pio- 59 (2) How large was the average early 60neer families that populated the Ken- 51 Haliburton pioneer family? naway village. Considering that Ken- 47 50 Acres (3) Is there a correlation between the naway was founded by the mid-1860s 40 Cleared 40 36 34 36 two, and if so, what is it? (but de nitely by 1868 when the settle- 30 30 25 25 32 25 (4) What speci c kinds of crops andAmount ment 23was ocially24 named), the 1871 20 18.6 Settlers' 20 livestock did the average early data depicts a 15Haliburton15 settlement Ages 10 6 Haliburton farmer tend, and ex- 10about half7 a decade into its life. e cen- actly how much of each? sus reports the number of acres of land 0 Settler's (5) How many acres of old growth that the familiest had clearedtt by 1871. u a ge Family erts Scot urton Sco b Canadian Shield forest could the Graph 1e Coleshows thatB the smallest farms, Sizes rg Ro arase Avera o s N ry Williams average pioneer family clear per Archiethose Scott of settlers Naraseauilliam andrle Cole, oc- n Ge James a ard Donald Watt W Thomas He Ch ern year? cupied 6 and 7 acres, respectively,B while To answer these and other questions, we the largest,Settlers those of Williams and Watt, will examine historical data about all of sprawled to 30 and 40 acres.33 A simple the pioneers from the Kennaway settle- tally of all nineTable farms 2: gives anAcres average Settler's Settler's ment in Harcourt Township in Halibur- size of 18.7 acres,Settlers aer almostCleared half a dec- Ages Family Size ton, which will serve, for us, as a sample ade ofArchie pioneering. Scott 20 23 5 of a typical early Haliburton pioneer vil- CensusGeorge data Cole also allow us to7 answer 24 3 lage. From this sample, we can construct what correlations,James Scott if any, existed between15 25 3 an accurate depiction of what we can reli- the agesWilliam of settlers Burton (heads of household),10 25 1 ably refer to as the “statistically average” familyThomas size, and Scott acreage cleared.15 We can 36 7 Charles Roberts 25 34 5 early Haliburton farm. also compare Haliburton to other agricul- Bernard Naraseau 6 47 10 Donald Watt 40 51 11 32 Dobrzensky, Fragments of a Dream, 130. Henry Williams 30 59 9 33 Martinello, Kennaway, 82. Average 18.6 36 6
OH autumn 2015.indd 187 08/09/2015 10:21:18 PM 188 ONTARIO HISTORY
GraphTable 2: Ages of Settlers Compared to Acres Cleared and Family Sizes opened up for farming in (1871) 70 the 1860s, many cottagers 59 60 today might understandably 51 47 50 Acres shake their heads, thinking 40 Cleared 40 36 34 36 about the area’s piney soil 30 30 25 25 25 Amount 23 24 and colder climate, and ask, 20 18.6 Settlers' 20 15 15 Ages 10 “What could they possibly 7 6 10 farm there?” Luckily for us, 0 Settler's t t n tt s u t s e e a g Family Kennaway’s original pio- ert Scot urto Sco b e Col B vera Sizes g Ro arase A r s N neers told us exactly what rchie Scot o onald Wat ry William A e ames illiam rle n G J homas a ard D e W T h H C ern they farmed, and how much B Settlers of it, in both census records
tural areasTable of 2: the province.Acres eSettler's natural asSettler's- and local tax assessment sumptionSettlers that the olderCleared the settlersAges were,Family Sizerolls. In 1871, settlers in Haliburton re- Archie Scott 20 23 5 theGeorge more Cole children 7 24 3 ported that the least (andJames therefore Scott farm-15 25 3 common cultigen hands)William Burtonthey would 10 25 1 grown in the area by Thomas Scott 15 36 7 likelyCharles have, Roberts and con- 25 34 5 far was barley, with sequentlyBernard Naraseau the more 6 47 10 only 24 bushels grown Donald Watt 40 51 11 acresHenry they Williams would be 30 59 9 in Kennaway. Hay fol- ableAverage to clear and have18.6 36 6 lowed, at 54.5 (16-lb. under crop, is born bundles), then peas out by an analysis of (58 bushels), spring the nine “founding wheat (147 bushels), families” of Harcourt turnips (230), oats Township in 1871 (1,370), and nally (see Graph 2). e potatoes, at a whop- average Haliburton ping 1,527 bushels.35 settler in 1871 was Graph 3a makes 36-years old and had it evident that Hali- Figure 3: e average Haliburton settlers erected burton’s settlers were a family size of six to boulder fences alont the perimeters of their elds. help clear and tend a ey sol ed two problems at once by clearing overwhelmingly oat farm of 18.7 acres.34 their intended elds of rocks and establishing the and potato farmers, When told that boundaries of their farms. Image source: Author. with much smaller the Haliburton region was originally sections of their farms dedicated to veg-
34 Ibid., 84. e single, notable exception to this rule is the settler Bernard Naraseau, the only original Kennaway settler who was a member of the Algonquin nation and was known to practice a diverse variety of traditional subsistence strategies rather than relying primarily on pioneer farming. Ibid., 68, and Do- brzensky, Fragment of a Dream, 151. 35 1871 Canada Census, s.v. “William Burton, George Cole, Bernard Naraseau, Charles Roberts,
OH autumn 2015.indd 188 08/09/2015 10:21:18 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 189
TableGraph 3
Total Bushels of Farm Produce (1871) Bushels of Barley in Kennaway Hay Peas Spring (1871) 3a Barley 54.5 58 3b 24 Wheat Donald 147 Watt 12 Potatoes Turnips Henry 1527 230 Williams 12
Oats 1370
Bundles (16-lbs.) Hay in Kennaway (1871) William 3c Bushels of Peas in Kennaway George Burton 3d Cole (1871) 2.5 Charles William 1 Burton Thomas Roberts 8 Scott Archie 5 Henry 14 Scott Williams 5 30 Donald Donald Watt Henry James Watt 12 Williams Scott 20 8 7 3f 3e Bushels of Spring Wheat in Kennaway Bushels of Turnips in Kennaway (1871) William (1871) Donald Donald Burton Watt Watt 16 40 30 Archie Henry Scott Williams 17 200 George Henry Cole Williams 38 36
Bushels of Potatoes in Kennaway (1871) 3g Bushels of Oats in Kennaway (1871) 3h George William George Bernard William Cole Burton Cole Charles Naraseau Burton 40 90 60 Roberts Henry 40 70 Henry 97 Williams Charles Williams Bernard 500 Roberts 350 Naraseau 100 100 Archie Archie Donald Thomas Scott Donald James Scott Watt James Scott 100 Watt Scott 100 350 Scott 300 400 100 100 etables and wheat.36 Not surprisingly, the produce grown on the farms help us Watt and Williams operated the farms to move from general discussions of Hal- with the most diverse crops, as theirs iburton farms to more detailed analyses were the largest in the region by a consid- of the farms’ actual outputs in the region erable margin. e data collected about of the Canadian Shield.
Archibald Scott, James Scott, omas Scott, Donald Watt, Henry Williams,” Dysart, Dudley, Harcourt, Guilford, Harburn & Bruton, Peterborough North, Ontario, accessed through Ancestry.com 36 Martinello, Kennaway, 86.
OH autumn 2015.indd 189 08/09/2015 10:21:19 PM 190 ONTARIO HISTORY
A Statistically for the Haliburton area. For crops common to the majority Average Farm of the settlers of in eastern Haliburton, he records reveal how powerful a yields increased in direct proportion to Tfactor farm size was in a ecting the the size of farms, the size of families and settlers’ ability to diversify their produce. the age of the farmer. Hay was grown for For example, the two large farms in Ken- livestock by eight of the nine founding naway, those of Williams (30 acres) and families of Kennaway in 1871. Only Ber- Watt (40 acres), were the only ones in the nard Naraseau, who relied partly on tra- settlement to produce barley (12 bushels ditional Algonquin methods, reported each) and turnips (30 bushels for Watt no livestock that year and consequently and 200 for Williams) and, along with produced no hay. Cole and Burton, both the small 10-acre farm of Burton, were the small farmers, produced 1.0 and 2.5 16- only ones to grow peas (8 bushels for Bur- pound bundles of hay, respectively. e ton, 20 for Watt, and 30 for Williams).37 mid-sized farms of Roberts and the two None of the other farmers in eastern Scott families reported between 5 and 8 Haliburton reported producing any such such bundles, while the large farms like vegetables. Dorothy Duncan notes that the Watt’s farm could produce 12 (see elsewhere in Ontario, “vegetables basic Graph 3d).40 is gives us an annual av- to everyday cooking would have included erage of 6.1 bundles (97.6 pounds) of hay cabbage, carrots, peas, onions, and tur- per settler on the Canadian Shield. nips...”38 e near absence of such crops One might assume that wheat would in eastern Haliburton, identi es one of be the staple crop in Haliburton as it the small ways that farming there di ered was in the more heavily farmed areas of from the rest of Southern Ontario. Per- Southern Ontario; however, only ve of haps they had an aversion to vegetables; the nine original families in Kennaway there was a common belief in the 1800s grew it in 1871. Yields were low, ranging that vegetables were actually bad for your from 16 to 40 bushels (see Graph 3e).41 health until they were vigorously boiled.39 Haliburton’s cooler climate and shorter In all likelihood, however, farmers would growing season do much to explain the not even grow these foodstu s unless de-emphasis on wheat, and settlers grew their farms were over 30 acres in size, large only spring wheat rather than the later-
37 Ibid., 87–93, and 1871 Census. Few Haliburton farmers decided to grow these crops. e meager 1871 production of all of the original nine families of the region yield averages of only 2.7 bushels of barley, 25.6 bushels of turnips, and 6.4 bushels of peas. 38 Dorothy Duncan, Canadians at Table: A Culinary History of Canada (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2006), 61. 39 Christina Bates, Out of Old Ontario Kitchens: A Collection of Traditional Recipes of Ontario and the Stories of the People Who Cooked em (Toronto: Pagurian Press Limited, 1978), 99. 40 1871 Census, and Martinello, Kennaway, 90. 41 Ibid., 92.
OH autumn 2015.indd 190 08/09/2015 10:21:19 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 191
Figure 4: e average Haliburton settlers constructed log cabins out of the pine trees on their lots. ey could cut the logs into rectangular pro les (as is the case here) or leave them round. Many of Kenaway’s decaying log cabins, aside om the boulder fences, are the only phyci- cal remains of the abandoned settlement. Image source: Author.
ripening fall wheat. Still, the aroma of freshly baked bread rose above the tree- tops, as the Haliburton pioneer farmer averaged 16.3 bushels of spring wheat in 1871. It seems that the shallow, piney soils of the Canadian Shield led nineteenth- century settlers to be predominantly oat and potato farmers. Together, the tubers and grain crops totaled 84 per cent of the 1871 yield in the eastern Haliburton settlement and, again unsurprisingly, the amounts that farmers produced mirrored their comparative farm sizes.42 Eight of the nine original Kennaway settlers grew oats, and every settler without exception Graph 3h). produced potatoes. In 1871, the smaller Why the near total dependence on 7-to-10-acre Haliburton farms like those oats and especially potatoes? ese culti- of Cole and Burton produced 60 and 70 gens were some of the few that grew well bushels of oats, mid-sized-15-to-20 acre in the sparse, rocky soils of Haliburton, farms produced about 100 bushels, and and there is evidence of a close relation- the large, 30-to-40-acre farms generated ship between nineteenth-century On- 400 and 500 bushels of the breakfast gru- tario settlers and spuds in historical lit- el (see Graph 3g). e potato yields were erature. Bates tells us “just as pork was similarly abundant, with 40 bushels be- oen the settler’s only choice of meat, the ing the minimum reported amount, and potato was the one dependable vegetable 90 to 100 bushels representing the norm and pork’s constant companion.”43 Even for mid-sized farms. e large farms pro- Catherine Parr Traill, who settled in the duced 350 bushels of spuds each, more 1830s just south of Haliburton, wrote than enough to ll the storage cellars of that “the potato is a... blessing here; new the settlers’ log cabins for the winter (see settlers would otherwise be greatly dis-
42 1871 Census, and Martinello, Kennaway, 94. 43 Bates, Out of Old Ontario Kitchens, 100, Martinello, Kennaway, 96.
OH autumn 2015.indd 191 08/09/2015 10:21:22 PM Table 4: 1871 Amounts of Livestock in Kennaway 25
Sheep 20 3 9 (27)
15 6 Cattle 10 4 (17) 10 3 3 2 2 2 3 Milk Numbers of Livestock 5 2 1 3 7 Cows 332 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 (17) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Pigs (14) 0
t t le n t tt ts tt o to o co r ms a seau r be a u o llia e C s Scot s Sc ie S ld W rg h R a Oxen (12) o me ma c y Wi n a o les r o Ge illiam B J Ar r D Th a 192 ONTARIO HISTORY W h Hen ernard Nar C B Eastern Haliburton Settlers Horses Table 4: 1871 Amounts of Livestock in Kennaway Horses (6)Oxen (12)Pigs (14)Milk Cows (17)Cattle (17)Sheep (27) Bernard Naraseau George Cole 21 William Burton 2 2 22 James Scott 2 13 2 10 Thomas Scott 2 13 2 Archie Scott 21 2 13 Charles Roberts 2 1 Henry Williams 2 23 3 49 Donald Watt 27 3 63 tressed, and the poor man and his family a horse. According to the census, oxen who are without resources, without the were the dra animals of choice in Hali- potato must starve.”44 Boiled, mashed, burton, and were owned by two-thirds or baked, the potato became, for Hali- of the settler families, twice as many as burton’s settlers, the staple that fuelled horse-owning families. As with horses, the expansion of furrows and elds. e settlers tended to own oxen in pairs: six average settler produced 152.2 bushels of families owned and tended exactly two oats and 169.7 of potatoes per annum. each,45 while, on average, settlers owned Our construction of a statistically 1.3 oxen per family. A team of these stur- average late-nineteenth-century Hali- dy dra animals could e ectively pull the burton farm would not be complete plows that parted the piney soils of the without an examination of the livestock Canadian Shield. upon which the settlers depended. e One might assume that pigs, being census of 1871 records that cows (17 hardier, easier to feed and quicker to ma- in the settlement), beef cattle (17), and ture than other animals would be most sheep (27) were the most abundant, fol- abundant in Haliburton. However, the lowed by smaller populations of pigs data prove otherwise. Animals that pro- (14), dra oxen (12), and horses (6). e duced a continuous supply of resources data [Table 4] indicate that in eastern such as dairy and wool were preferred. Haliburton the horse was the rarest ani- e food value of pigs was manifested mal, being owned by only three families, only when they were butchered. Four of each with two horses. eir primary role the six families that reported having pigs was likely as high quality dra animals, owned a single swine, one family had pulling wagons, carts, cutters, and plows. three, and the other had seven. But pigs With an average of only 0.67 per family, did have some presence in Haliburton, the typical settler was unlikely to own o ering pork, bacon, and ham at an aver-
44 Catherine Parr Traill, e Backwoods of Canada 1832–1835 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, New Canadian Library, 1966), 54. 45 1871 Census.
OH autumn 2015.indd 192 08/09/2015 10:21:22 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 193
age rate of 1.5 animals per settler. the attraction of sheep in an area like As for milk cows, seven out of the Haliburton, where nineteenth-century nine families in eastern Haliburton settlers had to be largely self-sucient. In owned them in 1871, each raising be- 1871, then, the settlers tended an average tween one and three animals. Cows were of three sheep each. obviously prized for their ability to pro- Agricultural Growth duce products such as milk, butter, and cheese on a long-term basis, without rough Time having to butcher them; they were the ith the preceding information, animal of choice in such a challenging Wwe can e ectively turn otherwise farming environment. is led to settlers dry statistics into an unusually accurate having an average of 1.89 milk cows per picture of life in early Haliburton and family in 1871. ere were just as many of nineteenth-century farming on the beef cattle in the settlement that year but Canadian Shield, but census data cannot distributed over six, rather than seven, of o er insight into factors that necessar- the families.46 eir distribution was also ily change over time, such as the average more erratic, with smaller farms having amount of forest- lled acres that set- one or two, and larger farms like those of tlers could clear per year, or the extent of Williams and Watt boasting four and six land that Haliburton’s farms eventually cattle, respectively. Clearly, established reached. Fortunately, we can connect the farmers in Haliburton could weigh down data from our snapshot year of 1871 to their dinner tables with roasts and steaks these factors by examining the tax assess- on special occasions. ment rolls kept by the Municipality of e nal animal reported in the Dysart et al, which includes the Kenna- 1871 census was sheep, and of all the re- way settlement in Harcourt. Each year, ported animals, they were most proli c Haliburton County ocials recorded (27 in total). Sheep were something of a the number of people in each family, the specialty animal in the area. Only ve of number of acres the family had cleared the original nine settler families of Ken- that year and the current size of their naway tended sheep and their “ ock” farms (in acres). is information, avail- sizes uctuated from 2 and 3 on some able in full for the years from 1871 to farms, to 9 and 10 on the others. Clearly, 1903, helps us discover what the region’s Haliburton settlers were rather selective average pioneer farm looked like, by illus- about their sheep, likely based on wheth- trating three factors: er a family would produce its own wool (1) the average maximum family size or buy/trade for it instead. e ability of throughout the pioneer period. sheep-tending families to use the animals (2) the average maximum farm size for mutton as well as wool highlighted over the course of the area’s de-
46 Ibid., and Martinello, Kennaway, 103.
OH autumn 2015.indd 193 08/09/2015 10:21:23 PM 194 ONTARIO HISTORY
Table 5 Max Max GraphTable 5: Maximum Family Sizes Compared to Acres Cleared cleared at their maximum Settler Farm Family Size Size 60 14 extents through the same pe- Creighton 25 4 50 12 10 riod. Tabulating these vari- A. Scott 55 6 40 Max 8 Farm D. Watt 50 10 30 ables reveals an interesting T. Scott 45 13 6 Size 47 20 correlation (see Graph 5). M. Watt 35 11 4 Max 10 2 Naraseau 30 12 Maximum Family Size Family In general, the bars recording L. Squagig 6 5 Maximum Farm Size 0 0 Size the maximum extent of acres t tt tt t tt u ig n e y ts tt s t e n d n a n E W. Burton 20 11 o a a o r o e G ea ag la c r s u urt be S A . Sc .W . Sco a q . Col o . illiam. Wat . Bir La cleared per family tend to G. Cole 15 7 D T M. W B G . Fin J J . Payn J . BurtoER reightonA ar . A .R L C N .S W .W . Swanto. Mc . McCreR V A. Finlay 35 2 L C H T M S A be shorter in the areas of the C. Roberts 25 7 Settlers J. Scott 15 graph where the line record- TableGraph 6: Average Acres of Farm Clearance Per Year H. Williams 30 9 ingTable the 6: maximum Average Acres number Cleared of 9 J. Watt 15 5 8.3 Per Year L. Payne 6 6 8 people in the families similarly T. Swanton 40 6 7 dips.Pioneer is Settler corroborates Acres Cleared the 6 5.5 J. Bird 86 5 55 Creighton 4.2 5 trend suggested by the 1871 M. McLaren 25 9 4.2 3.9 A. Scott 5.5 4 S. McCrea 32 8 3 3.3 3.3 censusD. Watt data, that the larger5 the 3 2.66 R. Burton 16 6 2 1.8 1.9 2 2 1.5 1.66 1.6 T. Scott 2 AVERAGE 26.1 7.15 1.2 pioneer family was, the more 1 M. Watt 3.9 Average Acres Cleared/Year acres of old growth forest they 0 Naraseau 1.8 t n tt t t u ig n le s tt tt s tt e d a n E to ot g o a could clear and have under h c a C rto L. Squagig 1.5 Sco sea u bert ayn . Bir u AG ig . . Wat .S . Wat ra . . Sco . Wa .W P J re A D T M a . Burto G Ro J T J . .B ER C N . Sq . . William L . McCreR V L W C H S A crop.W. Burton roughout the3 settle- Settlers mentG. Cole period, farms in1.66 the east- C. Roberts 8.3 velopment. ernJ. Scott Haliburton region5 had an (3) the average number of acres that average ofT. 7.15 Watt people per family5 who a Haliburton pioneer cleared per cleared anH. average Williams maximum 3.3farm size (which allows us to discover of 26.1 acres.J. Watt But how many 1.9acres, on year L. Payne 1.2 how many years it would take average, couldJ. Bird each settler clear?2 And a pioneer to reach the average how fast wereS. McCrea Haliburton’s homesteads1.6 maximum farm size). hollowed R.out Burton from the forest?2.66 From tax assessments, it is easy to To helpAVERAGE explain these gures,3.3 let us calculate the maximum size for each brie y examine one settler. Tax rolls and family—aer all the children were the land registry records for Harcourt born and before they started to move Township, show that pioneer M. Watt away. is can be done for the entire arrived in Kennaway in 1875.48 But his nineteenth-century period of pioneer land clearance totals are rst recorded in farming. Similarly, we can easily record 1884 and continue until he le the region the number of acres these families had in 1892. Over this time he cleared a total
47 Between 1871 and 1903, many more families came to farm in the Kennaway area in addition to the original nine. 48 1871–1903 Tax Assessment Registers, s.v. “Harcourt Township,” Municipality of Dysart et al., Haliburton County, Ontario.
OH autumn 2015.indd 194 08/09/2015 10:21:23 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 195
TableGraph 7: Comparison of % of Crops in Bushels: Kennaway vs. Non-Shield Townships 50 Grey 40 30 Simcoe 20 10 Township Oxford 0 of bushels in the % of Total Number Kennaway t s s n t s s s t a e n a ea rley or rye o a ip hea o p a c t e n w b whe b tur ck ota u p b Crop Types
of 35 acres for an Tableaverage 7: of Comparison 3.9 acres per of %turnips, of Crops 152.2 in Bushels:of oats, and 169.7 of pota- year.49 Averaging the forestKennaway clearance vs. Non-Shieldof toes. eir Townships farms would also be populated the seventeen settlers in the regionGrey from Simcoe with Oxfordan averageKennaway of 1.3 oxen, 1.5 pigs, 1.89 1871 until 1903 wheatand tabulating 16them in 24milk cows, 13 1.89 cattle, 4.3 3 sheep, and, if they a bar graph givesoats us the gures 25 seen in 24were particularly 26 lucky 40 or well o , a horse Graph 6. e slowestpeas Haliburton 9 farm- 9or two 12(an average 1.7 of 0.67). Until the end ers cleared just overbarley an acre per year, 6 while 9of the pioneering 10 0.7period at the advent of the most ambitiouscorn managed to 0.09 clear an 0.24 the twentieth 3.4 century, 0 their average fam- average of 8.3 acres.buckwheat Area settlers 0.05 cleared 0ily size 0.17 would grow 0 from 6 to 7.15 people rye 0.009 0.1 0.11 0 an average of 3.3 acres per year, and there- and their average farm size would balloon potatoes 17 20 11 45 fore could achievebeans the average maximum 0.03 0to 26.1 0.05 acres, which 0 they would clear at farm size of 26.1 acresturnips in 7.9 years, 26 an im- 13a rate of 24 about 3.3 6.7 acres per year and - pressive amount considering the density nally achieve in an average of 7.9 years. of the forest on the Canadian Shield. When the “average” Haliburton summer So what can all of this tell us about cottager asks incredulously, “What could the “statistically average Haliburton they possibly farm up here?” the answer farm”? Aer about half a decade into a has become as clear as the pristine waters settlement’s life, the typical settler was of the region’s many lakes. about thirty-six years old and had six ese statistics on agricultural pro- people in his family. ey would farm duction from eastern Haliburton can an average area of 18.7 acres, and would tell us more when we compare them to harvest from those acres an average of 6.1 a selection of townships south of the Ca- (16-pound) bundles of hay, 2.7 bushels of nadian Shield. In this way, we can further barley, 6.4 of peas, 16.3 of wheat, 25.6 of re ne our understanding of the speci c
49 Martinello, Kennaway, 287.
OH autumn 2015.indd 195 08/09/2015 10:21:24 PM 196 ONTARIO HISTORY
di erences between the two regions. reveal a signi cant deviation from the Graph 7 compares for 1871 crop usual farming standard. Farms south of outputs in southern counties with those the Shield oen became large cash-crop in Kennaway.50 In Grey, Simcoe, and Ox- enterprises, emphasizing the growing of ford Counties wheat, oats, potatoes, and wheat, with a good measure of corn and turnips were the most-produced crops, other vegetables. Farms of early Halibur- and all three shared a similar pattern of ton, however, remained small, single- overall crop production. In the Kenna- family, and near subsistence, producing, way settlement, on the other hand, oats overwhelmingly, potatoes and oats with and potatoes predominated and the yield a good measure of hay added to the mix. of all other crops was smaller; 13.3% Southern farms were homes to all types less in wheat and 14.3% in turnips. On of livestock, while those of Haliburton the other hand, Kennaway boasted 15% primarily raised animals that had multi- higher oat production and an impressive ple uses, such as cows for meat and milk, 29% higher rate for potatoes than the sheep for mutton and wool, and oxen for other three counties. Haliburton pioneer meat and pulling ploughs. Single-use ani- farmers clearly gravitated to a binary sys- mals such as pigs (meat) and horses (dra tem of crop production. animals) were rare. Finally, we now know how large Conclusion Haliburton farms were, how quickly is examination of the oldest pioneer families grew, and how long they took to settlements in early Haliburton details reach their maximum sizes. Similar stud- not only speci c agricultural activity ies of other Haliburton settlements, both but also how it di ered from the rest of abandoned and existing, will corroborate the province. e problems inherent in and/or re ne the vision of early farming farming on the Canadian Shield were presented here. Additionally, analogous made manifest early in the settlement research of farming in di erent regions of the region, but Ontario’s rapid popu- of Ontario can provide us with a greater lation expansion in the decades leading understanding of the comparative pace up to the 1860s, the economic needs of and pattern of agricultural development lumber camps, and the demand for new across the province. Settlers eventually farm lands persuaded legislators that the gave up farming in Haliburton (except area should be settled. Early on, settlers for some small-scale farms still around in Haliburton found that they could not today), but understanding the speci cs of simply import the time-honoured tradi- past human labour can ultimately inform tions from the older areas of the prov- our choices about how that labour is best ince. Census records and tax registers spent. Especially important today are our
50 H. Belden & Co., Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Simcoe, Ont. (Toronto: H. Belden & Co., 1881), 7. Each crop is shown as a percentage of the total output for all crops.
OH autumn 2015.indd 196 08/09/2015 10:21:24 PM the EARLY HALIBURTON FARM 197
decisions about how to use Ontario’s - opment increases and paves over the ag- nite land resources, a decision made more ricultural lands that were carved out by apparent each year as the speed of devel- early pioneer settlers.
OH autumn 2015.indd 197 08/09/2015 10:21:24 PM