Talk:Churchill, Manitoba

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Churchill, Manitoba article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Canada: Manitoba / Geography / Communities Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

Untitled

Factoid: Hudson Bay (the bay), but Hudson's Bay (the company). See the Canadian Oxford dictionary and CP Caps and Spelling --MarkB 19:29, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Whence and why the bears come

"It is most famous for the many polar bears that come ashore in the autumn, looking for easily available food. " Actually the bears don't "come ashore", they head from their inland summer living areas (hibernation?) toward shore, waiting for the bay to freeze so they can begin hunting for and feeding on seals through the winter months. A few rogue bears will wander close to town (specifically but not exclusively to the town dump), but these bears are usually quickly captured, taken to "polar bear jail" and then removed from the area via a "bear lift".

Some reference site: http://www.churchillmb.net/~cccomm/, http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/

Removing the reference links in the text

I removed the html tags for the references in the text because they were stopping the page from displaying properly. --Apyule 09:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Record precipitation event

In October 2006, 13.31 inches of precipitation fell in Churchill, MB. This is more than seven times the normal of 1.83* inches in October, shatters the previous record of 3.52 inches and is rather uncommon for a precip total in the subarctic regions. Much of the precipitation fell in blizzard conditions (with reports of hurricane force winds) from 10/11-10/14.

http://www.wunderground.com/history/station/71913/2006/10/1/MonthlyHistory.html

Videowizard2006 11:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another record total for November 2006, 11.54 inches of precipitation fell in Churchill. Normally, they get less than half an inch in November, so this total is 30 times greater than average. The previous wettest November was 7.36 inches. I'm surprised the media hasn't mentioned this, as this makes just under 25 inches in two months.

--Videowizard2006 02:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Port of Churchill

With news today of US interests expecting the Port of Churchill to benefit from global warming changes, I am reminded of the public efforts in the 1960s to promote use of the port for grain shipping. Is it still used to transport prairie grain? What is the history of the use of the port for shipping? Maybe the US owner of the port is on the right track? KenWalker | Talk 17:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Canada's only main port on the Arctic Ocean"

Looking at the map, the place is nowhere near the arctic ocean. Zazaban 01:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except Hudson's Bay is part of the Arctic Ocean. Geo Swan 02:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should that read "Canada's only mainland port in the Arctic Ocean?", what is a "main port", as there is a port in Nanisivik, which will be going through serious upgrading...--Kelapstick 12:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Churchill is a port, in the sense that goods are delivered there from other parts for forwarding on to other parts. Nanisivik is not a port, in that sense, because it only ships goods that are produced right there. It's not a through port. I would argue that this is exactly why the wording is good the way it is. 198.49.180.40 (talk) 22:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mainland port would work for me. Or port with a connection to the North-American railroad grid. Geo Swan (talk) 10:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that the origin of the goods matter when defining a marine shipping port. By the way, a sea shore, by definition cannot be inland. Additionally, it makes no difference whether it faces north, south east or west. Regards, BatteryIncluded (talk) 18:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, Kelapstick, when I looked at them, the actual plans for Nanisivik, were very modest. Permanent staff? (1) seasonal; (2) non-DnD caretakers. Geo Swan (talk) 00:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add more details to the sentence then, no? How about "Canada's only main port on the Arctic Ocean in the sense that [Churchill] connects to the North-American railroad grid. Another site Nanisivik ships locally produced goods." -- Ktsquare (talk) 14:51, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Climate section

I have a bit of a problem with the climate section. It says "Prevailing northerly winds from the North Pole jet across the frozen bay and chill it to a −26.7 °C..." but a quick look at the Envionment Canada site indicates that the winds in January are from the west. Now there is a small bay to the west and that may play a part in cooling but the winds are not from the north. "Churchill's winters are colder than a location at a latitude of 58 degrees north should warrant." First of all that isn't sourced. Who says it's colder? It then goes on to compare Churchill and Juneau, which is a lot warmer. However, looking at Cluff Lake, SK, Collins Bay, SK, Inukjuak, QC, Kuujjuaq, QC, Fort Chipewyan, AB, High Level, AB and Lynn Lake, MB shows that Churchill is colder than most of those places. However, it's not much colder only a few degrees in most cases. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 14:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you did a good job with this section, and the table hit the spot just right. BatteryIncluded (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Arctic

Churchill is also the major seaport in Canada for the Eastern Arctic

(looks at map of the Arctic) So where is the Eastern Arctic? The phrase doesn't seem to make sense.Ordinary Person (talk) 15:26, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. How'bout: "a major seaport in north-central Canada"? Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 18:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Western Arctic is the Yukon and western part of NWT, Eastern Arctic mostly means Nunavut. Most Cdns wouldn't really know where North-Central Canada is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.165.22 (talk) 17:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hay River, on Great Slave Lake, also has a rail link. While it is just a riverport, something like 1000 kilometres from the Sea, barges loaded there serve the Western Arctic, including some American facilities, off the shore of Alaska. Geo Swan (talk) 00:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is the size of the largest vessels the port can handle?

There is a List of deep water ports. Does Churchill merit listing there? I have argued for that other article being tuned, so it only lists ports above a specific size, like panamax. Can Churchill handle panamax vessels? Geo Swan (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I lived there I noticed that the grain-carrying vessels could enter the port only at high tide and had something like 3 feet to spare. Hope that helps. BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:40, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That is what I needed. Geo Swan (talk) 16:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why no roads link Churchill to anywhere else?

I don't really understand why Churchill isn't connected to any other city or town by street or highway, any answers as to that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.57.247 (talk) 01:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is thousands of miles of wet, shifting tundra. There is no significant commerce that would justify the expense of building and maintaining such road. The existing railway is barely self-sustainable thanks to the seasonal grain transport. BatteryIncluded (talk) 22:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will be visiting by rail as a tourist. I would have done so years ago if it were possible to drive my car there. "No significant commerce" right now, but don't be blind to the certainty that lots of tourism commerce would result if even a gravel road were constructed right next to the railroad. 75.163.142.160 (talk) 21:56, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wapusk National Park is located east of Churchill not south. There is no sportsfishing in Churchill, although there is goose hunting in the spring and fall. The cars in Churchill are left unlocked NOT because of the polar bears. They are left unlocked by most of the resident ALL year long. The polar bears are generally only around in the summer and fall. The reason the doors are left unlocked is that there is a low crime rate and anyone taking the car would be identified by other residents. As there is no road out whoever took the vehicle would have to return it to town afterwards, increasing the likelihood of being caught. Yes, we are known as the Polar Bear Capital of the World, and you could make a case for the Beluga Capital, but, as a resident, I have never heard it called C-town.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.200.30.10 (talk) 04:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re. sport fishing: They built a dam on the river near Mosquito Point (belugas don't go past that point for calving), so that upriver they could build fishing lodges for tourists. Also, I never heard anybody use "C-Town" nickname, and it is unreferenced. BatteryIncluded (talk) 06:23, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only Arctic Ocean seaport connected to the North American railroad grid?

Doesn't quite sound accurate, as the Port of Moosonee is also connected to the North American railroad grid. 75.163.142.160 (talk) 23:12, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Port Facilities Could Help Canada's Churchill". Maritime Executive. When the weather is warm, it is possible for maritime transportation to gain access to several coastal communities in the region. James Bay extends south from the southeastern area of Hudson Bay to the town of Moosonee that has railway service that extends south to Canada's most densely populated region. It appears possible at Moosonee, to develop intermodal connections between railway and maritime transportation that could carry food and goods to several Hudson Bay coastal communities.

So, I suggest, what the quote from the article above means, is that it would be possible to build an intermodal terminal, at Moosonee, but that none exists now. What is an intermodal terminal? Hay River is an example of an intermodal terminal. Standard sized shipping containers arrive there, by rail, and all the cargo in the shipping container is tranferred to a barge. An intermodal terminal can transfer cargo from rail, to an actual sea-going vessel. Hay River is a river port, and only services barges. Moosonee

"Moosonee, North of Toronto, May Become Salt-Water Outlet for Ontario". Toronto. 1960-01-13. Retrieved 2018-11-02. Provincial and federal engineers have begun a $100,000 preliminary study, with special attention to the problems of high tides and the miles of shallow delta-bottom that must be dredged for a channel where the Moose and several other rivers meet and flow into the bay.

So, the river wasn't dredged, in 1960. Has it been dredged, since then? I see no record of this dredging.

Without dredging Moosonee could be used to load barges, as at Hay River. But there don't seem to be any facilities to load or unload barges. Barges come in various sizes. The Mackenzie River is a big river, and can accommodate big barges. The Moose may only be capable of transitting medium, or small barges.

With dredging, and the construction of port facilities, like piers, cranes, etc, Moosonee could accommodate deeper seagoing ships. But this hasn't been done yet.

How expensive is it to dredge miles of channel in tidal flats? I dunno. More than one hundred million, maybe?

I think this means that Moosonee, currently, is a small riverport, where shallow barges have access to the sea. So, not a seaport.

https://web.archive.org/web/20030815131145/http://www.mtlmoose.com:80/vessels.htm - no longer online, not online since 2007, so maybe it has gone out of business.

According to https://northernontariommts.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/ttr_marine_techbackgrounder-2016-11-17.pdf the maximum size barge that can reach Moosonee has a draft of 1.8 metres (5.9 ft), beam of 13 metres (43 ft), length of 52 metres (171 ft).

So Moosonee is a riverport, not a seaport. Geo Swan (talk) 23:59, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"River conditions pushing company out of Moosonee". CBC News. 2014-05-14. Retrieved 2018-11-02. But Cool said he hasn't seen sediment build-up like this in his decades working the river. 'We are taking two or three tides to get out, where we would normally get out in one tide,' said Cool. 'That can make a difference of 12, 24 or 36 hours per trip.'

Tree line

The article mentions that it is north of the tree line, but there are trees in the picture next to the sign welcoming you to town! What gives? Titanium Dragon (talk) 03:48, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is at the tree line (taiga), but it does not mean that all trees shall die there. However, the tree line does not dictate the weather, so I did not revert your edit. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 05:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CFS or CFL

Hello all, Churchill,_Manitoba#History says the ionospheric study station owns callsign CFL but this pages say CFS. Which one is right? Or both are right but designate different stations?

Arctic port

User:Impulsion, the sources say Arctic port. Besides that, it's got nothing to do with latitude and it's a port on the shores of the Arctic Ocean.

Hudson Bay is as much the Arctic Ocean as the Mediterranean is part of the Atlantic Ocean. You wouldn't refer to Genoa or Alicante as Atlantic port towns or even Mediterranean port town on the first sentence of an encyclopaedic article. Churchill is often wrongly believed to be part of the Arctic because of the presence of Polar Bears, but this does not make it so. The geographical definition of the arctic has everything to do with latitude - see "The Arctic Circle, currently at roughly 66° north of the Equator, defines the boundary of the Arctic seas and lands". Again, Churchill is hundreds of miles outside of the Artic Circle, is further south than Helsinki or St. Petersburg, the climate is subarctic rather than polar and the surrounding biome is taiga rather than tundra. It is not 'arctic' by any stretch of the imagination. So this is completely misleading and has no place in an encyclopaedic article, especially on the first sentence. You could say a 'subarctic port town' but even that would be irrelevant to include in the first sentence. (talk) 09:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not for us on Wikipedia to decide if Hudson Bay is or is not part of the Arctic Ocean. Likewise, it's not up to us to decide if Churchill is an Arctic or subarctic town or none of the above. The sources define what Churchill is or is not and they define it as an Arctic port. Masterhatch (talk) 12:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for your examples of Genoa and Alicante being Mediterranean Sea ports, you're probably right that sources don't describe them as Atlantic ports. But sources do describe Churchill as an Arctic port. And since the sources say that, then we say that. Masterhatch (talk) 13:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are more sources that either say Churchill is on the Arctic Ocean or an Arctic port:

[1], [2], [3], [4]. Whether you agree it should be an Arctic port or not, sources clearly say it is. Masterhatch (talk) 13:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Churchill is often mistakenly believed to be in the Arctic because of the Polar Bears and because Hudson Bay leads to the Arctic Ocean, but just because it's often referred to as such doesn't make it so. Churchill is not within the Arctic, and that is not a matter of opinion. Hence 'Arctic port' is misleading. You will find many Canadian articles news and tourism related publications that refer to the Okanagan as a desert, with some going as far to claim it's an extension of the Sonora Desert. But that is contradicted by facts. (talk) 15:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We aren't talking about the Okanagan and the Sonora desert. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any reliable sources stating that the Sonora desert goes up that far. On the contrary, lots of reliable sources call Churchill an Arctic port. It may not be in the Arctic cirlcle but it is on the Arctic Ocean, therefore it is an Arctic port. I have provided multiple sources supporting Churchill as an Arctic port. Masterhatch (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And those sources are wrong. Hudson Bay may an extension of the Arctic Ocean but it is not the Arctic, hence 'Arctic port' is both inaccurate and misleading. You may as well also call Moosonee at the far south of James Bay an 'Arctic port'. Impulsion (talk) 15:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moosonee has no port but it is called "The Gateway to the Arctic". But, again, as with your previous comparisons and examples, it has nothing to do with the price of beer or whether Churchill is an Arctic port or not. It is your opinion that Churchill is not an Arctic port. It is an opinion that is contrary to reliable sources and we here on Wikipedia must follow reliable sources even if it's our opinion that the reliable sources are wrong. My personal opinion (for what it's worth) is that "Arctic port" implies Arctic Ocean port. No where do the sources say or imply that Churchill is above the Arctic circle. Anyways, that's my two bits. Masterhatch (talk) 16:25, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]