The Algoma District and That Part of the Nipissing District North of The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
" What Indians Are We Talking About?": a Discourse Analysis Of
"What indians Are We Talking About?": A Discourse Analysis of Intercultural Dialogues in an Ojibway Setting Jordan Davidson A Thesis in The Department of Sociology and Anthropology Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (Social and Cultural Anthropology) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada June 2008 © Jordan Davidson, 2008 Library and Bibliotheque et 1*1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-42480-3 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-42480-3 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par Plntemet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. -
The State of Lake Superior in 2000
THE STATE OF LAKE SUPERIOR IN 2000 SPECIAL PUBLICATION 07-02 The Great Lakes Fishery Commission was established by the Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries between Canada and the United States, which was ratified on October 11, 1955. It was organized in April 1956 and assumed its duties as set forth in the Convention on July 1, 1956. The Commission has two major responsibilities: first, develop coordinated programs of research in the Great Lakes, and, on the basis of the findings, recommend measures which will permit the maximum sustained productivity of stocks of fish of common concern; second, formulate and implement a program to eradicate or minimize sea lamprey populations in the Great Lakes. The Commission is also required to publish or authorize the publication of scientific or other information obtained in the performance of its duties. In fulfillment of this requirement the Commission publishes the Technical Report Series, intended for peer-reviewed scientific literature; Special Publications, designed primarily for dissemination of reports produced by working committees of the Commission; and other (non-serial) publications. Technical Reports are most suitable for either interdisciplinary review and synthesis papers of general interest to Great Lakes fisheries researchers, managers, and administrators, or more narrowly focused material with special relevance to a single but important aspect of the Commission's program. Special Publications, being working documents, may evolve with the findings of and charges to a particular committee. Both publications follow the style of the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. Sponsorship of Technical Reports or Special Publications does not necessarily imply that the findings or conclusions contained therein are endorsed by the Commission. -
Arguments in Favor of the Ottawa and Georgian Bay Ship Canal
ldo6 Oeoigian i3ay canal. Arguments in ravor ox the Ottawa and G-eorgian i3ay siiip canal. Ctbranj KINGSTON, ONTARIO > K*>) }?.Uk ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF THE OTTAWA AND GEORGIAN BAY 1 » WAP SKIP O -<A- 3SJ" A X# 5 THE SHORTEST, SAFEST, AND CHEAPEST ROUTE TO THE OCEAN FROM THE GREAT WEST, THROUGH CANADIAN TEPtRITORY AND THE ONLY CI.KT.UN M*ANS OK REVIVING AND RESTORING THE TRADE OF UNITED CANADA. ^%jm* y >.. .. — OTTAWA CITY, CANADA WEST. - 1856. n PRINTED AT OFFICE OF THE OTTAWA CITIZEN *. » » a II r=- , « « * * ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OP THE OTTAWA AND GEORGIAN BAY SHIP CANAIj; THE SHORTEST, SAFEST, AND CHEAPEST ROUTE TO THE OCEAN FROM THE GREAT WEST, THEOUGH CANADIAN TERRITORY; AND THE ONLY CERTAIN MEANS OF REVIVING AND RESTORING THE TRADE OF UNITED CANADA. OTTAWA CITY, CANADA WEST. ----- 1856. PRINTED AT OFFICE OF THE OTTAWA CITIZEN, YSo\^ At the first meeting of the Municipal Council of the United Counties of Prescott and Russell, held for the present year, at the Court House in L'Orignal, a petition was presented and unanimously adopted : u That a memorial be immediately drawn up and signed by the Warden, to the three branches of the Government, in favour of the Ottawa and Georgian Bay Ship Canal, and that a sum be appropriated to bring the subject, in a pamphlet form, before the public, and that Chas. P. Treadwell, Esq., Sheriff of these United Countiea, be requested to compile the same." In compliance with the foregoing request, and while offering nothing new of my own, I have selected from various papers letters and leading articles bearing on this most important subject. -
TOWNSHIP of GILLIES RR#I,1092 Hwy. 595, Kakabeka Falls, Ontario POT Lwo Tel: (807) 475-3185
TOWNSHIP OF GILLIES RR#I,1092 Hwy. 595, Kakabeka Falls, Ontario POT lWO Tel: (807) 475-3185. Fax: (807) 473-0767 E~Mail: [email protected] • www.gilliestownship.ca Reeve: Rick Kleri Administration: Councillors: Rosalie A. Evans, Rudy Buitenhuis COPIEDTO: COUNCH... 0 DEPT HEAOSCJ Solicitor·Clerk, Deputy Treasurer Willlam Groenheide Nadia La Russa, Treasurer Karen O'Gorman Shara Lavallee, Deputy Clerk Wendy Wright February 10, 201 5 AC110tt ~l£Dcc ~ Rc:: oEPTH~SD Transmitted by email: REFERRED TO: '\. l .. I ,...c:; All Municipal Clerks For Municipalities in Northern Ontario (North of the French River) Re: Resolution of the Council of The Corporation ofthe TOWlShip of Gilties th Passed on February 9 , 2015, relating to the Chicken Farmers of Ontario Exempt Flock Limit Dear Mr. or Madam Cleric Please be ad vised that the Council of The Corporation of the Township of Gillies passed the fol lowing resolution (moved by Councillor O'Gorman and seconded by Councillor Groenheide) at its regular meeting held February 4th, 2015: WHEREAS the current exempt flock limit of 300 broiler birds from the quota system of the Chicken Farmers of Ontario is too low to allow a viable business model for small scale producers; AND WHEREAS other Provinces have higher exemption levels, which allow for local small agri-business economic development; AND WHEREAS Premier Wynne promotes increased agricultural production in Ontario to enhance the local food movement; AND WHEREAS Northern Ontario's economy is an excellent setting for agricultural production as diversification -
TOXIC WATER: the KASHECHEWAN STORY Introduction It Was the Straw That Broke the Prover- Had Been Under a Boil-Water Alert on and Focus Bial Camel’S Back
TOXIC WATER: THE KASHECHEWAN STORY Introduction It was the straw that broke the prover- had been under a boil-water alert on and Focus bial camel’s back. A fax arrived from off for years. In fall 2005, Canadi- Health Canada (www.hc-sc.gc.ca) at the A week after the water tested positive ans were stunned to hear of the Kashechewan First Nations council for E. coli, Indian Affairs Minister appalling living office, revealing that E. coli had been Andy Scott arrived in Kashechewan. He conditions on the detected in the reserve’s drinking water. offered to provide the people with more Kashechewan First Enough was enough. A community bottled water but little else. Incensed by Nations Reserve in already plagued by poverty and unem- Scott’s apparent indifference, the Northern Ontario. ployment was now being poisoned by community redoubled their efforts, Initial reports documented the its own water supply. Something putting pressure on the provincial and presence of E. coli needed to be done, and some members federal governments to evacuate those in the reserve’s of the reserve had a plan. First they who were suffering from the effects of drinking water. closed down the schools. Next, they the contaminated water. The Ontario This was followed called a meeting of concerned members government pointed the finger at Ot- by news of poverty and despair, a of the community. Then they launched tawa because the federal government is reflection of a a media campaign that shifted the responsible for Canada’s First Nations. standard of living national spotlight onto the horrendous Ottawa pointed the finger back at the that many thought conditions in this remote, Northern province, saying that water safety and unimaginable in Ontario reserve. -
Rank of Pops
Table 1.3 Basic Pop Trends County by County Census 2001 - place names pop_1996 pop_2001 % diff rank order absolute 1996-01 Sorted by absolute pop growth on growth pop growth - Canada 28,846,761 30,007,094 1,160,333 4.0 - Ontario 10,753,573 11,410,046 656,473 6.1 - York Regional Municipality 1 592,445 729,254 136,809 23.1 - Peel Regional Municipality 2 852,526 988,948 136,422 16.0 - Toronto Division 3 2,385,421 2,481,494 96,073 4.0 - Ottawa Division 4 721,136 774,072 52,936 7.3 - Durham Regional Municipality 5 458,616 506,901 48,285 10.5 - Simcoe County 6 329,865 377,050 47,185 14.3 - Halton Regional Municipality 7 339,875 375,229 35,354 10.4 - Waterloo Regional Municipality 8 405,435 438,515 33,080 8.2 - Essex County 9 350,329 374,975 24,646 7.0 - Hamilton Division 10 467,799 490,268 22,469 4.8 - Wellington County 11 171,406 187,313 15,907 9.3 - Middlesex County 12 389,616 403,185 13,569 3.5 - Niagara Regional Municipality 13 403,504 410,574 7,070 1.8 - Dufferin County 14 45,657 51,013 5,356 11.7 - Brant County 15 114,564 118,485 3,921 3.4 - Northumberland County 16 74,437 77,497 3,060 4.1 - Lanark County 17 59,845 62,495 2,650 4.4 - Muskoka District Municipality 18 50,463 53,106 2,643 5.2 - Prescott and Russell United Counties 19 74,013 76,446 2,433 3.3 - Peterborough County 20 123,448 125,856 2,408 2.0 - Elgin County 21 79,159 81,553 2,394 3.0 - Frontenac County 22 136,365 138,606 2,241 1.6 - Oxford County 23 97,142 99,270 2,128 2.2 - Haldimand-Norfolk Regional Municipality 24 102,575 104,670 2,095 2.0 - Perth County 25 72,106 73,675 -
Freedom Liberty
2013 ACCESS AND PRIVACY Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Ontario, Canada FREEDOM & LIBERTY 2013 STATISTICS In free and open societies, governments must be accessible and transparent to their citizens. TABLE OF CONTENTS Requests by the Public ...................................... 1 Provincial Compliance ..................................... 3 Municipal Compliance ................................... 12 Appeals .............................................................. 26 Privacy Complaints .......................................... 38 Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA) .................................. 41 As I look back on the past years of the IPC, I feel that Ontarians can be assured that this office has grown into a first-class agency, known around the world for demonstrating innovation and leadership, in the fields of both access and privacy. STATISTICS 4 1 REQUESTS BY THE PUBLIC UNDER FIPPA/MFIPPA There were 55,760 freedom of information (FOI) requests filed across Ontario in 2013, nearly a 6% increase over 2012 where 52,831 were filed TOTAL FOI REQUESTS FILED BY JURISDICTION AND RECORDS TYPE Personal Information General Records Total Municipal 16,995 17,334 34,329 Provincial 7,029 14,402 21,431 Total 24,024 31,736 55,760 TOTAL FOI REQUESTS COMPLETED BY JURISDICTION AND RECORDS TYPE Personal Information General Records Total Municipal 16,726 17,304 34,030 Provincial 6,825 13,996 20,821 Total 23,551 31,300 54,851 TOTAL FOI REQUESTS COMPLETED BY SOURCE AND JURISDICTION Municipal Provincial Total -
Looking for a Boiler Supply & Servicing Company with The
Service Area Volume 49 • June 2017 South West tel: 519 884 0600 505 Dotzert Court, fax: 519 884 0213 Unit 1 toll free: 1 800 265 8809 Waterloo, ON N2L 6A7 www.waterloomanufacturing.ca East tel: 613 228 3597 19 Grenfell Crescent, Bay 1 fax: 613 225 0116 Ottawa (Nepean) ON toll free: 1 800 265 8809 K2G 0G3 www.waterloomanufacturing.ca Looking For A Boiler Supply & Servicing Company With The Knowledge & Experience To Get It Right? We are that company and we want to help you optimize your boiler room. Established in 1850, Waterloo Manufacturing Ltd. has a long history of growth and evolution that continues to this day. In our early days we began as a manufacturer of farm machinery equipment, steam engines, pulp and paper rolls, and in 1947, became an authorized Cleaver Brooks Representative for South West Ontario. In 1984, we streamlined the company to further focus on solely providing boiler room equipment solutions in South West Ontario. In 2015, a unique opportunity arose to expand our company to include the Eastern Ontario region formerly covered by John M. Schermerhorn Ltd. In 2017, a further opportunity arose to expand our company to include the territory formerly represented by Johnson Paterson, Inc. to be the sole representative for Cleaver Brooks in the province of Ontario. *Refer to Map on Page 4. Ontario West Central Ontario Ontario East • Brant County • Algoma District • Carleton County • Bruce County • Cochrane District • Dundas County • Dufferin County • Durham County • Frontenac County • Elgin County • Haliburton County • Glengarry -
Prosp Rpt Magpie Prop
Prospecting Report on the Magpie Property By John Buckle, P.Geo. October 25, 2003 REVISED FEBRUARY 15, 2004 2.26586 RECEIVED FEB 1 9 GEOSCIENCE ASSESSMENT j OFFICE—- _ ., 42C02NE2003 2.26586 LECLAIRE 010 Introduction This report covers the work done during the summer and fall of 2003 on the 80 hectar property claim number 1235586. Two 6 claim units were staked November 17 and 18, 2001. Following a declaration from the mining recorder to extend the claim block to enclose the full one square kilometre available in Leclaire township in Sault Ste Marie district, claim map G2782. Mineral claim staking in this township was originally under the control of Algoma Central Railway and subsequently by Wagner Forest Services except for a few claim blocks that predated the ACR agreement. One of these blocks that straddles the Magpie River is Crown Land with mineral rights administered by the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines. The claim block was staked in the name of John Buckle, prospecting license # C39049, client number^ 13252 . The claims were subsequently transferred to Oasis Diamond Exploration the current claim holder. My first visit to the property was prior to staking on November 16, 2001. On this visit I recognized mafic to intermediate breccia on an outcrop in the Magpie River with a field assistant Mr. Constantine Foussekis. The property was subsequently staked the following two days and reconnaissance samples were collected for examination. On May 6, 2003 I revisited with Mr. Nicolas Pedafironimos of Oasis Diamond exploration. On this visit prospecting and geological mapping of the outcropping peninsula and the opposite coastline on the east shore of the Magpie River. -
Restoration of Woodland Caribou to the Lake Superior Region
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln U.S. National Park Service Publications and Papers National Park Service 1994 Restoration of Woodland Caribou to the Lake Superior Region Peter J. P. Gogan Yellowstone National Park Jean Fitts Cochrane USFWS, Anchorage, AL Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/natlpark Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Gogan, Peter J. P. and Cochrane, Jean Fitts, "Restoration of Woodland Caribou to the Lake Superior Region" (1994). U.S. National Park Service Publications and Papers. 11. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/natlpark/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the National Park Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in U.S. National Park Service Publications and Papers by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 9 Restoration of woodland caribou to the Lake Superior region PETER J. P. GOGAN AND JEAN FITTS COCHRANE Introduction Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) historically occupied the boreal forest zone across the North American continent. The distribution and abun dance of the species has declined in the past century. In particular, it has been extirpated from much of the southern limits of its historical range on both sides of the boundary between Canada and the United States (Bergerud 1974). Translocation of animals from extant populations may be used to reestablish populations in portions of the species' former range. Recently, wildlife biolo gists in Ontario have translocated woodland caribou to a number of sites in or adjacent to Lake Superior. While it is too soon to evaluate their long-term suc cess, these restoration efforts do provide useful insights into factors likely to influence the outcome of woodland caribou translocations elsewhere. -
2018 Ontario Fishing Regulations Summary
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10 ZONE 10 50 Recreational Fishing Regulations 2018 ZONE 10 SEASONS AND LIMITS • Dates are inclusive; all dates including the first and last dates stated in the summary are open or closed SPECIES OPEN SEASONS LIMITS SPECIES OPEN SEASONS LIMITS Walleye & Jan. 1 to Mar. 31 S - 4; not more than 1 greater than 46 Brook Trout* Jan. 1 to Sept. 30 S - 5 Sauger or any & 3rd Sat. in May cm (18.1 in.) C - 2 combination to Dec. 31 C - 2; not more than 1 greater than 46 Brown Trout* 4th Sat. in Apr. to S - 5 cm (18.1 in.) Sept. 30 C - 2 Largemouth & 3rd Saturday in S - 6 Rainbow Trout* Open all year S - 2 Smallmouth June - November C - 2 C - 1 Bass or any 30 combination Lake Trout* Jan. 1 to S - 2, not more than 1 greater than Labour Day 40 cm (15.7 in.) Northern Pike Open all year S - 6; not more than 2 greater than 61 C - 1 cm (24 in.), of which not more than 1 is greater than 86 cm (33.9 in.) Splake* Open all year S - 5 C - 2; not more than 1 greater than 61 cm C - 2 (24 in.), none greater than Pacific Salmon* Open all year S - 5 86 cm (33.9 in.) C - 2 Muskellunge 3rd Sat. in June to S - 1; must be greater than 91 cm (36 in.) Atlantic Salmon* Jan. 1 to Sept. 30 S - 1 Dec. 15 C - 0 C - 0 Yellow Perch Open all year S - 50 Lake Whitefish Open all year S - 12 C - 25 C - 6 Crappie Open all year S - 30 Lake Sturgeon Closed all year C - 10 Channel Catfish Open all year S - 12 Sunfish Open all year S - 50 C - 6 C - 25 * Aggregate limits apply to these species. -
Beaufort Sea: Hypothetical Very Large Oil Spill and Gas Release
OCS Report BOEM 2020-001 BEAUFORT SEA: HYPOTHETICAL VERY LARGE OIL SPILL AND GAS RELEASE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Alaska OCS Region OCS Study BOEM 2020-001 BEAUFORT SEA: HYPOTHETICAL VERY LARGE OIL SPILL AND GAS RELEASE January 2020 Author: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Alaska OCS Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Alaska OCS Region REPORT AVAILABILITY To download a PDF file of this report, go to the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (www.boem.gov/newsroom/library/alaska-scientific-and-technical-publications, and click on 2020). CITATION BOEM, 2020. Beaufort Sea: Hypothetical Very Large Oil Spill and Gas Release. OCS Report BOEM 2020-001 Anchorage, AK: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Alaska OCS Region. 151 pp. Beaufort Sea: Hypothetical Very Large Oil Spill and Gas Release BOEM Contents List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 What is a VLOS? ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 What Could Precipitate a VLOS? ................................................................................................ 1 1.2.1 Historical OCS and Worldwide