DOCSLIB.ORG

OAS News Articles 3 President’S Message 7 Excavations at the Lewis Site

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OAS News Articles 3 President’S Message 7 Excavations at the Lewis Site New Series Volume 13, Issue 5 ISSN 0048–1742 September/October 2008 Excavation underway at Lewis site –- Sarah Jagelewski, Matt Perlanski and Loren Scott excavating stone foundation. Photography courtesy TRCA. OAS News Articles 3 President’s message 7 Excavations at the Lewis Site 5 Chapters’ Corner 9 New Stories from Old Fort York: Assets in Place 14 Media Review 16 Reminiscences of Ivan Kocsis 18 Letters to the Editor Visit us on the Web at www.ontarioarchaeology.on.ca Ontario Archaeological Society BOARD OF DIRECTORS APPOINTMENTS President Editor, Ontario Archaeology Jean-Luc Pilon Andrew Stewart [email protected] [email protected] Director of Finance/Treasurer Editor, Arch Notes Henry van Lieshout TBD (416) 446-7673 [email protected] Editor, Website Director of Chapter/Professional Jean-Luc Pilon Services COMMITTEES Jim Keron (519) 285-2379 Advocacy Task Force [email protected] Chair: Carole Stimmell Director of Heritage Advocacy Awards and Volunteer Recognition Carole Stimmell Committee (416) 698-1164 Ext. 23 (w) Chair: Jennifer Birch [email protected] Board Review Committee Director of Membership Services Chair: Alicia Hawkins Alistair Jolly [email protected] Education Committee Director of Outreach & Education Chair: Ryan Primrose Christine Caroppo, Carole Stimmell Services Ryan Primrose First Nations Liaison Committee [email protected] Chair: Jean-Luc Pilon (OAS, Museum of Civilization) Director of Student Services Gary Warrick (WLU), Brandy George (TMHC), Jennifer Birch Merv Sarazin (Algonquins of Pikwàkanagàn), [email protected] Holly Martelle (OAS, TMHC) Director of Publications Nominating Committee Alicia Hawkins Chair: Alicia Hawkins (705) 675-1151 ext. 4224 [email protected] Professional Committee Chair: Alistair Jolly Executive Director Cathy Crinnion, Holly Martelle, Jean-Luc Pilon, Lorie Harris Paul Racher, Andrew Murray PO Box 62066 Victoria Terrace Post Office Moderator – Ontario Archaeological Society Toronto, Ontario M4A 2W1 Listserve (OAS-L) http://tech.groups.yah- Phone/fax: (416) 406-5959 oo.com/group/OAS-L/ [email protected] Vito Vaccarelli September/October 2008 Arch Notes 13(5) 3 President’s message n mid-September I attended, along pieces are there: proper presentation, potential and ultimately, the soundness with about 25 others, a meeting in elements of content, etc. If they pass of the recommendations which can Kingston, organized by the Min- muster, then the reports are added to either save a heritage site through Iistry of Culture. It was the Eastern ‘the Register’: an ever-expanding mitigation or conservation, or consign Archaeology Regional Roundtable. By collection of archaeological reports it to the back of a dump truck and now, most licensed archaeologists in that can be consulted by the public (see oblivion in a landfill or under a parking Ontario will have participated in section 65 or Part VI of the Ontario lot. Such expertise, it would seem to similar regional discussion groups Heritage Act). me, should be found within the across the province, either in person or Much was made of this goal of Ministry of Culture and it should be via teleconference. As an event, it will adding reports to this register. But exercised from within that branch of undoubtedly be repeated, and most in surprisingly, the Ministry no longer government. At present, this no longer attendance seemed to agree that the evaluates the intellectual content of the seems to be the case. But I stand to be opportunity of meeting and exchanging reports per se: “we are not an approval corrected. information was worthwhile. agency.” That all-important respons- This whole situation was echoed For the Ministry and Neil Downs, in ibility is now apparently assumed by lately in Eastern Ontario, near the town particular, this was an important others, such as municipalities for of St. Isidore. Like elsewhere, the chance to meet with the people ‘in the example. And from what we heard at municipality there is anxious to attract trenches’ so to speak. Neil is new to that meeting, and from what we hear new industries and see employment archaeology and to the Culture from others elsewhere in Ontario, created within their region. One Programs Unit that he manages (he those approval agencies set the bar for proposal would see the presumed joined them in 2007). He began the heritage conservation in their part of location of an early XIXth century evening’s session by updating part- Ontario. If a municipality has no church and associated graveyard icipants on the goings-on within the bylaws requiring heritage assessments, turned into one such new center of unit: issues surrounding staffing, the there is nothing to trigger this process. much needed jobs. backlog of unreviewed reports, the Further, the approval agencies In theory, this should not be an issue. report review process, Aboriginal determine significance and standards. Archaeological assessment and mit- engagement, the Draft Standards and This is why, apparently, in the GTA, igation should clear it, one way or Guidelines question, terms and consultants are held to the new, but another. It seems though, that the conditions, PIF procedures, collections unapproved, Draft Standards and necessity of undertaking this ad- management issues and emergency Guidelines, while elsewhere in the ditional expense is not broadly shared reviews. province, the old, now long-in-the-tooth by local planners. Some local citizens From his presentation, it is clear that Archaeological Assessment Technical are concerned that possible burials that he and his staff face some fairly Guidelines (1993) continue to be used. now lie unmarked, will be disturbed daunting challenges, not the least of It is an odd situation where there are without proper efforts taken to either which is to clear the backlog of post- no longer uniform yardsticks for protect them or move them. Moreover, 2005 reports. This presentation was assessing whether work has been the reception these citizens have followed by a lively and at times heated properly done. Moreover, the ability of received about their concerns have discussion of issues of interest to those municipal planners to assess not only been less than encouraging. It has not present. A lot of debate surrounded the the form of consultants’ reports, but the been pleasant and it’s not over, but I ways in which consultants reports are intellectual contents of these, remains naively thought the Heritage Act and reviewed by the Ministry. to be developed. This should be a cause the Cemeteries Act were clear on such An interesting point to emerge was for serious concern by OAS members. matters, but local officials may not the way that the Ministry’s role in the A checklist approach to evaluating the share that understanding or aware- archaeological process has undergone work of a consultant only reflects on ness. metamorphosis and continues to do so. the consultant’s report structuring As of this writing, a Stage 1 study has The Ministry issues archaeological ability (beware of boiler plates!). Less been requested. This is a good sign. licences under the Ontario Heritage easily assessed by someone unfamiliar Everyone should adopt a wait and see Act, a piece of legislation for which it is with archaeological ‘science’ is the position before anything else is done. responsible. The Ministry reviews the logic behind the assessments or deter- Certainly, many will be interested in reports in order to ensure that all the minations of things like significance, the findings and recommendations. September/October 2008 Arch Notes 13(5) 4 How many other similar cases take knowing about those who came before participants of this year’s symposium, place across the province? For me, it us (Noble), that new and innovative merci! Very importantly, the OAS highlights the need for municipalities to research continues to mine collections thanks the elders (Native and non- be made perfectly aware of their gathered quite some time ago (Bittner Native) who shared their under- responsibilities and how to carry them and Jamieson, Murphy) and that standings with all present. out. Information and training are key. consultants can find the time to present With 445 municipalities currently in the results of some of their fieldwork New Executive Director Ontario, this is a daunting task, but it is and actually carry out analyses beyond On the late breaking news front, the one that must be taken up with some the report requirements, thus happily board of directors join all OAS members urgency. contradicting the fears expressed in the in welcoming Lorie Harris as our new Beyond these issues, something that previous paragraph. Executive-Director (you can read about struck home once again as we sat for Lorie elsewhere in the issue of Arch more than three hours near the shores Toronto Symposium Notes). We also extend our thanks to all of Lake Ontario was the tremendous The OAS Symposium held in Toronto those who applied for this important amount of archaeological work that is now behind us. The organizers put position. takes place every year in Ontario. The their heart and souls into developing a pace is staggering and when we stop theme which is near and dear to Finalement and think of the infinitesimal amount of archaeologists – that of collaborations. Et finalement, je veux simplement that information that ever goes beyond Archaeology is an esoteric pursuit for attirer votre attention au fait que le site the consultant field report stage, I many. We have the challenge and the internet de la Société ontarienne wonder about the nature of our responsibility to break down the d’archéologie est dorénavant bilingue. understanding of the past. barriers that make archaeology appear Deux grandes sections du site like a distant and complex area of demeurent disponibles qu’en anglais (le Ontario Archaeology inquiry. Sommaire de l’archéologie de l’Ontario As you read this message, you should An important element of et les messages du président), mais have received your most recent copy of collaboration is first being understood, nous envisageons nous attaquer à ce Ontario Archaeology (81/82).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toronto Has No History!’
    ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY By Victoria Jane Freeman A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Toronto ©Copyright by Victoria Jane Freeman 2010 ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY Doctor of Philosophy 2010 Victoria Jane Freeman Graduate Department of History University of Toronto The Indigenous past is largely absent from settler representations of the history of the city of Toronto, Canada. Nineteenth and twentieth century historical chroniclers often downplayed the historic presence of the Mississaugas and their Indigenous predecessors by drawing on doctrines of terra nullius , ignoring the significance of the Toronto Purchase, and changing the city’s foundational story from the establishment of York in 1793 to the incorporation of the City of Toronto in 1834. These chroniclers usually assumed that “real Indians” and urban life were inimical. Often their representations implied that local Indigenous peoples had no significant history and thus the region had little or no history before the arrival of Europeans. Alternatively, narratives of ethical settler indigenization positioned the Indigenous past as the uncivilized starting point in a monological European theory of historical development. i i iii In many civic discourses, the city stood in for the nation as a symbol of its future, and national history stood in for the region’s local history. The national replaced ‘the Indigenous’ in an ideological process that peaked between the 1880s and the 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Study on a Potential Susquehanna Connector Trail for the John Smith Historic Trail
    Feasibility Study on a Potential Susquehanna Connector Trail for the John Smith Historic Trail Prepared for The Friends of the John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail November 16, 2009 Coordinated by The Bucknell University Environmental Center’sNature and Human Communities Initiative The Susquehanna Colloquium for Nature and Human Communities The Susquehanna River Heartland Coalition for Environmental Studies In partnership with Bucknell University The Eastern Delaware Nations The Haudenosaunee Confederacy The Susquehanna Greenway Partnership Pennsylvania Environmental Council Funded by the Conservation Fund/R.K. Mellon Foundation 2 Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3 Recommended Susquehanna River Connecting Trail................................................................. 5 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 6 Staff ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Criteria used for Study................................................................................................................. 6 2. Description of Study Area, Team Areas, and Smith Map Analysis ...................................... 8 a. Master Map of Sites and Trails from Smith Era in Study Area........................................... 8 b. Study
    [Show full text]
  • Rouge River Rouge River
    Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Cultural Heritage Goal: Recognition, preservation, and celebration of cultural heritage in the Rouge River watershed to increase awareness and understanding of past human relationships with the environment . Cultural Heritage Key Findings: • For 10,000 years, the Rouge River Watershed has been used by humans in some way, beginning with aboriginal hunters and farmers, explorers, traders, men of God, soldiers, surveyors, and finally settlers. • Over 1,360 archaeological and heritage sites located in the Rouge River watershed and historical accounts reveal the watershed is rich in heritage value. Knowledge gained from these sites and many more potential sites can provide an appreciation of past human relationships with the environment. • Early aboriginal inhabitants were nomadic hunters and later farmers and villagers with the introduction of agriculture about AD 700. The 3 acre Milroy site, overlooking Little Rouge River, is an example of a Late Woodland Iroquoian longhouse village, and one of a dozen such sites in the watershed. • European settlement began in Markham Township in the eighteenth century with the German-speaking Berczy settlement. Settlement in other parts of the watershed was slower due to absentee owners. • By 1861 there were 54 mills on the River. • Over 22 architectural styles lend a unique identity to the 19 th century Rouge River landscape. This array of architecture has arisen due to the sophistication and complexity of its Euro-Canadian settlers. • The 2001 Canadian census showed that in the Rouge River watershed people of Canadian or British heritage make up 31% of the population, with the remainder being Chinese (21%), East Indian (9%) and over 35 other cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interim Report – a Master Plan of Archaeological Resources for the City of Toronto, August 2004
    Interim Report August, 2004 A MASTER PLAN OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES FOR THE CITY OF TORONTO Prepared by Submitted to Archaeological Services Inc. Heritage Preservation Services in association with: Culture Division Cuesta Systems Inc. City of Toronto and Toronto City Hall, 2nd Floor, Suite A15 Commonwealth Historic Resources Management Limited 100 Queen Street West Golder Associates Toronto, Ontario M5H 2N2 Historica Research Limited Tel.: (416) 338-1096 Fax: (416) 392-1973 AMASTER PLAN OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES FOR THE CITY OF TORONTO INTERIM REPORT PROJECT PERSONNEL Project Directors: Mr. Peter Carruthers1,Dr. Ronald F. Williamson1 Project Historian: Ms. Mary MacDonald1 Environmental Archaeologist: Dr. Robert I. MacDonald1 Aboriginal Advisor: Dr. William Woodworth Archaeological Site Research: Ms. Beverly J. Garner1, Ms. Deborah Steiss1 Heritage Planning Research: Mr. Chris Andreae5, Dr. Hal Kalman3, Mr. Andrew Mason4, Ms. Eva MacDonald1 GIS Development and Analysis: Mr. Robert Murdoch2, Ms. Brenda Stephan2, Ms. Nancy DeHahn2 Graphics and Design: Mr. David Robertson1 1Archaeological Services Inc. 2Cuesta Systems Inc. 3Commonwealth Historic Resources Management Limited 4Golder Associates 5Historica Research Limited ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many individuals have contributed to the collection and compilation of data for this study. It is only through their cooperation and gen- erosity that this work was made possible. One public meeting was held during this phase of the study, hosted by the Toronto Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society. Our thanks go to Ms. Penny Young for accommodating our request to meet with the Toronto archaeo- logical community. Ms. Dena Doroszenko, Mr. David Spittal, Mr. Steve Otto, Ms. Penny Young, and Mr. Joe Muller participated in anoth- er meeting, with the entire consulting team, to discuss planning for the identification of potential for the survival of archaeological deposits in urban contexts.
    [Show full text]
  • The People of Scarborough
    ~THE SCARf>OROUGH PuBLIC LIBF{\RY I BOARP THE PEOPLE OF SCARBOROUGH Map of Scarborough ,.; .; .,; ::. .,; .,; .,; "'""- :;, -< "" -< "" "" 'ti "" "" S.teele~ Ave. V IV Finch Avenue III Sileppail.d Ave. 11 D St. REFERENCE POINTS 1. Thomson Park Z. Bluffer's Park J 3. civic Centre 4. Kennedy Subway 5. Metro Zoo Ikml 6. Guild Inn 1 mile! Map of Scarborough courtesy of Rick Schofield, Heritage Scarborough THE PEOPLE OF SCARBOROUGH The City of Scarborough Public Library Board Copyright© The City of Scarborough Public Library Board 1997 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, by photocopying, recording or otherwise for purposes of resale. Published by The City of Scarborough Public Library Board Grenville Printing 25 Scarsdale Rd. Don Mills, Ontario M3B 2R2 Raku ceramic Bicentennial Collector Plate and cover photo by Tom McMaken, 1996. Courtesy of The City of Scarborough. Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Myrvold, Barbara The People of Scarborough: a history Includes index. ISBN 0-9683086-0-0 1. Scarborough (Ont.) - History. I. Fahey, Curtis, 1951- . II Scarborough Public Library Board. III. Title. FC3099.S33M97 1997 971.3'541 C97-932612-5 F1059.5.T686S35 1997 iv Greetings from the Mayor As Mayor of the City of Scarborough, and on behalf of Members of Council, I am pleased that The People of Scarborough: A History, has been produced. This book provides a chronological overview of the many diverse peoples and cultures that have contributed to the city's economic, cultural and social fabric.
    [Show full text]
  • Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail Connecting
    CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH CHESAPEAKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL CONNECTING TRAILS EVALUATION STUDY 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 405 Annapolis, MD 21403 CONTENTS Acknowledgments 2 Executive Summary 3 Statement of Study Findings 5 Introduction 9 Research Team Reports 10 Anacostia River 11 Chester River 15 Choptank River 19 Susquehanna River 23 Upper James River 27 Upper Nanticoke River 30 Appendix: Research Teams’ Executive Summaries and Bibliographies 34 Anacostia River 34 Chester River 37 Choptank River 40 Susquehanna River 44 Upper James River 54 Upper Nanticoke River 56 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are truly thankful to the research and project team, led by John S. Salmon, for the months of dedicated research, mapping, and analysis that led to the production of this important study. In all, more than 35 pro- fessionals, including professors and students representing six universities, American Indian representatives, consultants, public agency representatives, and community leaders contributed to this report. Each person brought an extraordinary depth of knowledge, keen insight and a personal devotion to the project. We are especially grateful for the generous financial support that we received from the following private foundations, organizations and corporate partners: The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, The Clay- ton Fund, Inc., Colcom Foundation, The Conservation Fund, Lockheed Martin, the Richard King Mellon Foundation, The Merrill Foundation, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, the Rauch Foundation, The Peter Jay Sharp Foundation, Verizon, Virginia Environmental Endowment and the Wallace Genetic Foundation. Without their support this project would simply not have been possible. Finally, we would like to extend a special thank you to the board of directors of the Chesapeake Conser- vancy, and to John Maounis, Superintendent of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Office, for their leadership and unwavering commitment to the Captain John Smith Chesapeake Trail.
    [Show full text]
  • National Historic Sites of Canada System Plan Will Provide Even Greater Opportunities for Canadians to Understand and Celebrate Our National Heritage
    PROUDLY BRINGING YOU CANADA AT ITS BEST National Historic Sites of Canada S YSTEM P LAN Parks Parcs Canada Canada 2 6 5 Identification of images on the front cover photo montage: 1 1. Lower Fort Garry 4 2. Inuksuk 3. Portia White 3 4. John McCrae 5. Jeanne Mance 6. Old Town Lunenburg © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, (2000) ISBN: 0-662-29189-1 Cat: R64-234/2000E Cette publication est aussi disponible en français www.parkscanada.pch.gc.ca National Historic Sites of Canada S YSTEM P LAN Foreword Canadians take great pride in the people, places and events that shape our history and identify our country. We are inspired by the bravery of our soldiers at Normandy and moved by the words of John McCrae’s "In Flanders Fields." We are amazed at the vision of Louis-Joseph Papineau and Sir Wilfrid Laurier. We are enchanted by the paintings of Emily Carr and the writings of Lucy Maud Montgomery. We look back in awe at the wisdom of Sir John A. Macdonald and Sir George-Étienne Cartier. We are moved to tears of joy by the humour of Stephen Leacock and tears of gratitude for the courage of Tecumseh. We hold in high regard the determination of Emily Murphy and Rev. Josiah Henson to overcome obstacles which stood in the way of their dreams. We give thanks for the work of the Victorian Order of Nurses and those who organ- ized the Underground Railroad. We think of those who suffered and died at Grosse Île in the dream of reaching a new home.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX E Terrestrial Archaeology Stage 1 Report
    DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPENDIX E Terrestrial Archaeology Stage 1 Report DRAFT SCARBOROUGH WATERFRONT PROJECT – Toronto and Region Conservation ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT (STAGE 1) IN THE CITY OF TORONTO SCARBOROUGH WATERFRONT PROJECT LOTS 18 TO 27 CONCESSION B, LOTS11 TO 23 CONCESSION C, AND LOTS 3 TO 17 CONCESSION D HISTORIC SCARBOROUGH TOWNSHIP, YORK COUNTY WF-14-005 PIF P338-0101-2014 ORIGINAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2015 Archaeology Resource Management Services 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, ON M3N 1S4 trca.on.ca/archaeology Archaeology Resource Management Services MTCS Licence Issued to: 5 Shoreham Drive Janice Teichroeb (P338) Downsview, ON M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 ext. 6406 trca.on.ca/archaeology [email protected] trca archaeology resource management services (stage 1) scarborough waterfront project Executive Summary A Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment was triggered by the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act for the Scarborough Waterfront Project in the City of Toronto. This Environmental Assessment (EA) is being conducted by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and is aimed at creating a new waterfront park along the Lake Ontario shoreline from Bluffers Park to East Point Park in the City of Toronto. The goal is to create a destination park featuring a system of linked scenic landscapes both along the top of the bluffs and at the water’s edge integrating shoreline regeneration, public access and safety, and natural heritage. The study area is located on Lots 18 to 27 Concession B, Lots 11 to 23 Concession C, and Lots 3 to 17 Concession D in historic Scarborough Township, York County. The objectives of this study are to provide information about the property’s geography, history, previous archaeological fieldwork and current land conditions in order to evaluate the property’s potential to contain cultural heritage resources that might be impacted by the modifications proposed in the EA.
    [Show full text]
  • VOL 43 DAY 43 September 16, 2019
    ·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Court File No. 94-CQ-50872CM ·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ONTARIO ·3· · · · · · · · · ·SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE ·4· · · · B E T W E E N: ·5· · · · ·THE CHIPPEWAS OF SAUGEEN FIRST NATION, and THE ·5· · · · · · · ·CHIPPEWAS OF NAWASH FIRST NATION ·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Plaintiffs ·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · - and - ·7· · · · · · · · THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, ·7· · · · HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO, THE ·8· · · · · · ·CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF GREY, THE ·8· · · · · · CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF BRUCE, THE ·9· · · · · CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NORTHERN ·9· · · · BRUCE PENINSULA, THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF 10· · · · ·SOUTH BRUCE PENINSULA, THE CORPORATION OF THE 10· · · · TOWN OF SAUGEEN SHORES, and THE CORPORATION OF 11· · · · · · · · THE TOWNSHIP OF GEORGIAN BLUFFS 11· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Defendants 12 13· · · · · · · · · · · · · · Court File No. 03-CV-261134CM1 14· · · · A N D· ·B E T W E E N: 15· · · · ·CHIPPEWAS OF NAWASH UNCEDED FIRST NATION and 15· · · · · · · · · · · SAUGEEN FIRST NATION 16· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Plaintiffs 16· · · · · · · · · · · · · · - and - 17· · · ·THE, ATTORNEY GENERAL, OF CANADA and HER MAJESTY 17· · · · · · · · ·THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO 18· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Defendants 19 20· · · · · · · · · · · · · · -------- 21· · · · ---· This is VOLUME 43 / DAY 43 of the trial 21· · · · proceedings in the above-noted matter, being 22· · · · held
    [Show full text]
  • ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK the Following Is Supplementary
    ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK The following is supplementary information on the Rouge National Urban Park, a Parks Canada park, requested by the Office de Consultation Public de Montréal on May 18, 2017 from Les Amis du Parc Meadowbrook, during the presentation of its brief on the “Proposition de Développement du secteur Pierrefonds-Ouest.” In addition to the documents cited in the bibliography at the end, information in this supplement can be found on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rouge_National_Urban_Park and, unless otherwise noted, quotations in this document are drawn from that source. We have consulted with Parks Canada staff and they consider the Wikipedia entry to be accurate. How did the people of Toronto get Rouge turned into a National Park? Some of the nearly 7,900 hectares of wilderness, wetlands, cultural landscapes, and farmlands that have been saved and are in the process of being converted into a national park, were slated for development in the mid-1980s. The threat of losing this large ecosystem, started a movement of over 30 years of community leadership and stewardship to urge the three levels of government – municipal, provincial, and federal - to act and to create the park, which is a process that is still ongoing. What was the process that led to the park’s creation? (The) “original Rouge Park was established in 1995 by the Province of Ontario in partnership with cities of Toronto, Markham and Pickering, the regional municipalities of York and Durham and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. The original park consisted of approximately 40 square kilometres of parkland in Toronto, Markham and Pickering.
    [Show full text]
  • National Historic Sites and Historic Canals Across Canada 33
    National Parks, National Historic Sites and Historic Canals across Canada 33 O Canadian Patrimoine Heritage canadien Canada Canadian Heritage The Department of Canadian Heritage promotes Canada's distinctive identity and its cultural and natural heritage. The Department also contributes to our social and economic enrichment. There are four sectors in the Department: Citizenship and Canadian Identity Cultural Development and Heritage Parks Canada Corporate Services This directory was prepared by the Communications Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage, with assistance and information provided from the department's six regional offices. For information about this directory please contact: Communications Branch Parks Canada Sector (819) 994-2534 Canadian Heritage 1995 Parks Canada To protect and present our natural and cultural heritage Our national parks and national historic sites are a source of pride for all Canadians - part of our identity as a people and a country, recognized around the world as symbols of Canada. National Parks Parks Canada, as part of the Department of Canadian Heritage, administers one of the largest park systems in the world. Our first national park was created at Banff, in 1885. Today there are national parks in every province and territory - 36 so far, covering about 2 percent of the land surface of Canada. Protected for the benefit, education, and enjoyment of all Canadians, national parks showcase the range of landscapes, plants and wildlife that form our beautiful and awe-inspiring natural environment. National Historic Sites The Department recognizes the importance of commemorating Canada's history. Canada's national historic sites system comprises over 775 national historic sites. Today, Parks Canada administers 130 of these special heritage places, including seven operating historic canals.
    [Show full text]
  • North America
    RESEARCHING THE WORLD’S BEADS: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Compiled by Karlis Karklins Society of Bead Researchers Revised and Updated 1 July 2021 NORTH AMERICA This section covers the continental United States and Canada. For references published prior to 1985, see the two bibliographies prepared by Karklins and Sprague, q.v. See also the two specialized theme bibliographies and the General and Miscellaneous bibliography as they also contain reports dealing with these countries. Abel, Timothy J., James W. Bradley, and Lisa Anderson 2018 Rediscovery and Analysis of Copper Beads from Two Iroquoian Sites in Jefferson County, New York. The Bulletin: Journal of the New York State Archaeological Association; https://www.academia.edu/38042171/. XRF analysis of four copper beads – some of which were believed to be European – revealed that they are all made of native copper, confirming that there is no verifiable evidence of European trade goods among the precontact Iroquoian people of northern New York. Abel, Timothy J. and Adrian L. Burke 2014 The Protohistoric Time Period in Northwest Ohio: Perspectives from the XRF Analysis of Metallic Trade Materials. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 39(2):179-199. Concludes that, while not precise enough to source native coppers, XRF is a cheap, nondestructive method for differentiating native copper from its European counterparts at 16th- and 17th-century Late Woodland sites. The analyzed material included beads and pendants. Adams, Jenny L. and Mark D. Elson 1995 Personal Ornaments, Pigments, Rocks, and Mineral Specimens. In The Roosevelt Community Development Study. Volume 1: Stone and Shell Artifacts, edited by Mark D. Elson and Deborah L.
    [Show full text]