The Rotting Heart of Gatineau Park: How and Why the Kingsmere-Meech Lake Privatopia Prevented a National Park Near Canada's Ca
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The rotting heart of Gatineau Park: How and why the Kingsmere-Meech Lake privatopia prevented a national park near Canada’s capital by Michael Christopher Lait A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology in Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario © 2017 Michael Christopher Lait Lait (draft do not cite) I Abstract First proposed in 1913, Gatineau Park could have been the first national park east of the Rocky Mountains, the first in Quebec, and the first near-urban national park in Canada. Ultimately, the Quebec government proved unwilling to cede territory to the federal government, and the park proposal was shelved. In 1938, the Mackenzie King government responded to a public campaign organized by local cottagers and the Ottawa Ski Club by establishing the “Gatineau Park.” Newspapers announced the creation of a national park, and the first expropriations were carried out under this pretense. Gatineau Park is a failed national park. This study shows that federal authorities not only proceeded to establish a park without the consent of the Quebec government, they also failed to consolidate territorial control. My analysis addresses the question of how and why this national park failed, and documents the influence of the Meech Lake Association (MLA) and Kingsmere Property Owners’ Association (KPOA) on the park’s creation, development, and management. I argue that the park’s status as a “mixed- use/ownership area” represents a provisional achievement of these property owners’ associations. Further, I argue that the park is a key component of the Kingsmere-Meech Lake privatopia, with the MLA and KPOA exercising territoriality over adjacent park areas. This study also explores the implications of the lack of legal status for the park’s management by the National Capital Commission (NCC). It documents several examples where this fragmented territory seriously hindered NCC park management. It reveals that NCC officials encountered considerable resistance from property owner associations when opening Meech Lake to public use (and Kingsmere Lake remains off-limits). The NCC has also had to expropriate, at great expense, several residential subdivisions and commercial developments. I offer four recommendations to bring the park’s administration closer in line with Canada’s national parks: 1) legislated boundaries; 2) consultations with, and consent of the Algonquin; 3) consultations between provincial and federal governments; and, 4) consolidated control of the park’s territory. For the latter, the NCC should exercise zoning powers, impose a moratorium on new development, and have right of first refusal over all property sales within park boundaries. Lait (draft do not cite) II Acknowledgements My most immediate thanks are due to my supervisor, Patricia Ballamingie. Trish has been in my corner from the day we meet and seeking her supervision was easily the best decision I made during my PhD. All her students know how lucky they are to have worked under her supervision. Trish is a great teacher and a wonderful human being. My work has also benefitted immensely from the feedback, patience, and thoughtful advice of my committee members, Bruce Curtis and William Walters. I cannot thank them enough for all their support, help and encouragement. This work has also been improved by feedback received from my thesis examiners, Julia Harrison and Jill Wigle. I also had the good fortune of getting Gatineau Park activist Jean-Paul Murray to provide feedback on this work, and share valuable information. I look forward to working with him and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) in the future to pressure Parliament into passing Gatineau Park legislation. I’d also like to express thanks to the Executive Director of the Ottawa-Valley chapter of CPAWS, John McDonnell, who hired me years several ago as a research intern to document the history of the chapter’s campaign for protective park legislation. That work introduced me to many passionate and intelligent people who have helped orient my research: Sheila Thomson, Theodore ‘Ted’ Mosquin, Bill Gard, Stephen Knowles, Ian Huggett, Ken Buchan, Scott Findlay, Jim Fraser, Lorna McCrea and Brett Hodnett. This work is dedicated to the memory of Doug Anions, a friend and champion of the park. I’m grateful for the support of the Department of Sociology & Anthropology at Carleton University, especially the staff, Paula Whissell, Darlene Moss, and Marlene Brancato, and department/graduate heads, Aaron Doyle and Xiaobei Chen. My sincere thanks to all the students and faculty over the years who have showed interest in my research: Phil Primeau, Jean- Philip Crete, Matt Sanderson, Aaron Henry, Will Nham. My work benefitted from the feedback obtained from peer-reviewers of the Canadian Journal of Urban Research, the Ottawa Studies issue co-edited by Nicholas Scott and Tonya Davidson. This research has also benefitted from comments received after a talk delivered before the Mobilities and Migration reading group: Kara Bisson-Boivin, Ugur Yildiz, Jennifer Matsunaga, Victoria Simmons, Julia Calvert, and Ajay Parasram. My research would have not been possible without the assistance of the research professionals in the National Capital Commission. I’d especially like to express gratitude to Lindsay Stephenson and Judy Booth for all of their help over the years. The assistance of Marc Robillard at Library Archives Canada was extremely helpful. My thanks to all the archivists and librarians who’ve aided my research. From 2012 to 2016, this work was financially supported by an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. I’d like to express my appreciation to my friends who’ve stayed with me as I plugged away. Thanks to my parents, Ken and Heather, for many hours of entertaining discussion about my research and the great but often-times frustrating city in which we live. They have not heard the end of it! Lastly, I’d like to thank Christina Hovey for her love and companionship, and that of our non-human family, Bruce and Muskwa, who’ve clocked hundreds of therapy hours pro bono. Lait (draft do not cite) III While I have received a substantial amount of assistance in preparing this research, any errors and omissions are mine alone. Finally, this work on Gatineau Park was done on, with, and for unceded and unsurrendered Algonquin territory. Lait (draft do not cite) IV Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... I Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... II Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ IV List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... VI List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ VII List of Appendices .................................................................................................................... VIII List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. IX Introduction A tempest in a teapot… or a symptom of the rot? .......................................................................... 1 Territoriality .................................................................................................................................... 9 Phronesis ....................................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter contents............................................................................................................................ 26 Chapter 1: Territorialities of the federal government Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 32 Territorialization of Canada’s national parks ............................................................................... 34 Territorialization of the national capital ....................................................................................... 49 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 72 Chapter 2: From Algonquin hunting territory to Ottawa’s recreation territory Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 75 Colonization of Algonquin territory ............................................................................................. 78 The Gatineau Hills privatopia ....................................................................................................... 87 Gatineau Hills denudation issue.................................................................................................... 99 The creation of Gatineau Park .................................................................................................... 113 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................