Introduction: This is something that I have been working on for many years, combining my love of maps, local politics, boundary markers, and the attitudes and emotions that all of those bring and those that I grew up with. I'd like to dedicate this one to my father, Harold, who has always been insightful and honest, and to the late Vic Kelly, the historian of Gurd Township.
Call it eagerness, but the fact that Nipissing Township was surveyed before the other townships around it set in motion a series of compromises that either benefitted or hindered their neighbours.
Nipissing Township, Parry Sound District
Dimensions: Lots running east to west, concessions running south to north: 30 lots wide from concessions I to XXIII. Nipissing proper, that is 1874-1970, before the annexation of Gurd, is to use the cliché, one of those things that are not like the others. When the townships of Parry Sound District were being surveyed in the late 1860’s and early 1870’s, the standard size was 35 lots wide (east-west) and XIV (14) concessions long (north-south), with a few exceptions. The logical way of surveying was to start where the last survey left off, which would mean that Parry Sound District was surveyed from south to north, extending from Muskoka. However, Nipissing village had been settled before the surrounding area had been surveyed and so in 1874 their own survey had begun, one year before that of Gurd (to its south and west), and two years before Himsworth (south and east) and Patterson (west). Thus the early surveyors of Nipissing Township had no reference point upon which to base their survey. So instead of continuing with the quilt-like, or checkerboard-resembling, square townships of the rest of the District, Nipissing resembled a rectangle, centered around Nipissing village and South Bay (Lake Nipissing), moved further east (10 lots) and south (6 concessions) than it should have lied. This created a dilemma for the surveyors that laid out the plans for the adjacent townships: how would they be accommodated?
Gurd Township, Parry Sound District
Dimensions: Lots running west to east, concessions running south to north: 35 lots wide from concessions I to VIII, and 14 lots wide from concessions IX to XX.
What should have been Nipissing’s southwest quadrant, was given to Gurd, to make up for what should have been Gurd’s northeast quadrant, resulting in Gurd having a panhandle (the hamlet of Hotham is located here). The area that Gurd was given is almost exactly what was taken, minus a few square kilometres because of another error of those early Nipissing surveyors; the positioning of the boundary one lot too far to the west. This resulted in the road allowances not running fluidly like they do across the rest of Parry Sound District (again with a few exceptions). When the roads running north-south meet at the Nipissing-Gurd Boundary, one has to follow the boundary road allowance 440 yards (the east-west length of one standard lot) either way (depending on what direction one is travelling: head east if heading south, and head west if heading north), to match up with the nearest road allowance running in the same north-south direction.
Himsworth Township, Parry Sound District
Dimensions: Lots running east to west, concessions running south to north: 37 lots wide from concessions I to VIII, and 28 lots wide from concessions IX to XXVIII.
Himsworth was surveyed as a single township in 1876 most likely because the northern half was missing a considerable area and was possibly deemed too small to eventually become a functioning township (early townships were laid out with a certain size taken into account to adequately provide enough land area to accommodate a certain number of farms that could then be taxed in order to create an incorporated township; essentially a standard set for self sustaining rural population by density, townships neither too large nor too small). Himsworth was surveyed with XXVIII (28) concessions, the exact doubling of one township, and varying from 37 lots wide in the south to 28 lots wide in the north. Himsworth was then divided ten years after its initial survey, in 1886, into a North and South, the modern equivalents of Callander and Powassan, respectively, but instead of the division occuring between the XIV and XV concessions, it was surveyed 3 concessions to the north, between XVII and XVIII, and not along a road allowance. This exact location may have been picked for one, or a combination of the following two reasons: 1) while North Himsworth was already missing an area of 10 lots by 11 concessions, a near equitable area of 28 lots by 3 concessions would be taken to make North Himsworth best resemble a square (all extreme points of the township are equidistant from the centre of the township); and/or 2) the southern half of North Himsworth is dominated by an area colloquially known as The Brouley, a near impassable area of rock outcroppings surrounded by numerous swamps, bogs, marshes, and muskeg. What should have been the northwest quadrant of South Himsworth was surveyed as part of Nipissing, as was the entire western edge of North Himsworth, to sum up the above.
Patterson Township, Parry Sound District
Dimensions: Lots running west to east, concessions running south to north: 35 lots wide from concessions I to VI, 49 lots wide from concessions VII to XXIV.
Patterson lies to the west of Nipissing, and while already extending to XXIV concessions, was given an extra area measuring 14 lots by 15 concessions (an area that held what should have been Nipissing’s northwest quadrant). In fact, the additional area granted to Patterson encompassed a portion that would have been more northerly than Nipissing’s northern boundary altogether, measuring 14 lots by 7 concessions (Perhaps this area combined with Patterson’s initial northerly extension which would total 50 lots (keeping in mind the east-west one lot error) by 9 concessions, equaling 450 lots, could have constituted a township that would have roughly resembled the size of a normal 35 lot by 14 concession township, equaling 490 lots). Not taking into account Patterson’s extra long north-south length as a result of being the furthest north township in Parry Sound District and the surveyors not wanting to create a township measuring 35 lots by only 10 concessions, the addition of what should have been Nipissing’s northwest quadrant plus, essentially made Patterson the size of two full townships.
Chisholm, Nipissing District
Dimensions: Lots running west to east, concessions running south to north: 29 lots wide from concessions I to XVIII.
Chisholm is found in Nipissing District, not to be confused with Nipissing Township, which is found in Parry Sound District, and separated by Himsworth Township from Nipissing and Gurd townships. The fact that Chisholm is 29 lots and not 30 lots wide is most likely not a result of Nipissing’s surveying mistakes, but perhaps why it is not 35 lots wide. The boundary between Parry Sound and Nipissing districts extends to the east by 7 lots where Laurier (Parry Sound) and Ballantyne (Nipissing) end, and where Himsworth (Parry Sound) and Chisholm (Nipissing) begin. Himsworth could have been only 30 or 32 lots wide, however, in an attempt to make up the territory lost to Nipissing, the boundary of Himsworth was pushed eastward another 5 lots to the next road allowance, and thus the present boundary. This forced Chisholm to be granted 4 extra concessions, extending it northerly, and thus surrounding Wasi Lake entirely (if it were not for this extension, Chisholm would only have half of the lake in its jurisdiction, the other half being in Ferris). The area that Himsworth thus inherited from what should have been Chisholm measures 5 lots by 14 concessions equaling 70 lots, while the area that Chisholm inherited from what should have been Ferris measures 29 lots by 4 concessions equaling 116 lots.
Ferris, Nipissing District
Dimensions: Lots running east to west, concessions running south to north: 29 lots wide from concessions I to X, 41 lots wide from concessions XI to XVIII.
Ferris was divided in 1921 into East and West, the latter and the smaller of two was subsequently annexed by the city of North Bay in 1968. The contiguous Ferris was long on its north-south axis with an extension to the northwest (this extension is what later became West Ferris). However, Ferris was roughly fifty percent larger than a standard township as a result of its north and northwesterly extensions. As like Chisholm, Ferris’ southerly half measured only 29 lots wide, a result of losing its 5 western lots to Himsworth. Had Himsworth not inherited these additional 5 lots on its eastern edge, and Chisholm not inherited 4 concessions on its northern edge, rather they be granted to Ferris, Ferris would have been divided into two townships rather than surveyed as one entirely, similar to this situation of North and South Himsworth. East Ferris would have been South Ferris and measured 34 or 35 lots by XIV concessions, and West Ferris would have been North Ferris and measured 41 lots by XIII concessions (328 lots).
Those exceptions I’ve been talking about…
Not all townships are the standard 35 lots by XIV concessions, instead there are some that exist, and not by error, that measure 32 or 37 lots by XIV concessions. That would suggest that some townships have a deficit of 3 lots, or an additional 2 lots. To explain this a little further, road allowances occur every 2 concessions north-south, while occurring every 5 lots east-west. This is because a standard 100 acre lot measures 440 yards (east-west) by 1100 yards (north-south). Thus the distance between road allowances is as follows: 5 lots east-west, and 2 concessions north-south, to create a block measuring 2200 yards by 2200 yards, or a mile and quarter by a mile and a quarter, and giving all 10 lots encompassed access to a road allowance. To explain the 32 and 37 lot wide townships, there exists what I have dubbed a ‘ribbon’ running in a north-south fashion across East Parry Sound, or Almaguin. It starts with McMurrich (now McMurrich/Monteith) being 32 lots wide, followed by Armout, Strong, and Laurier all measuring the same. When the ribbon meets Himsworth, and because of the additional 5 lots given to it from Chisholm and Ferris, Himsworth then measure 37 lots wide. To explain the 28 instead of 27 lot wide portion of Himsworth, well that answer reverts back to the result of Nipissing being one lot too far to the west, thus adding that lot to Himsworth, while taking it away from Gurd and the Patterson extension.
Advantages, Disadvantages, and Humour
Nipissing placed itself strategically cupping South Bay, having a territory equidistant from its shores. While the western shore of South Bay is virtually uninhabited, the eastern shore which makes up part of the South Shore of Lake Nipissing is a booming cottage area with easy access to transportation connections, i.e., Highway 11 and the Canadian National Railway. In the area that it took from Himsworth, is located Nipissing’s community centre and Fire Station #1, only 1300 metres from the boundary between modern day Nipissing and Callander (not exactly centered or equidistant, but close none-the-less to the more so populated, and in some opinions, heavily favoured, South Shore). Had Nipissing been surveyed properly, it would have only had a sliver of are on the eastern shore of South Bay, between what is today lots 10 and 11. The area that was taken from what should have modern day Powassan, is the area known as Nipissing Ridge, the eastern reaches of Alsace Road, and the southern portion of Christian Valley, where exists prime agricultural lands.
Possibly the most lucrative lands taken in today’s terms, is that from what should have been Gurd’s. The area surrounding and including Ruth, Wolfe, Gerber, and McQuaby lakes should have been completely inside of Gurd, with the exception of McQuaby, which should have reverted from being 95% in Nipissing and only 5% in Gurd, to the exact opposite. This would have resulted in Gurd being much more manageable, possibly becoming an organized township all on its own instead of being annexed by Nipissing in 1970, and it would not have had the burden of having an exclave of sorts in the cut off hamlet of Hotham, which would have been part of Nipissing. It is not erroneous or foolish to think that Gurd would have benefitted from the taxation of cottagers on those lakes, and the farmland along the Alsace Road.
Another error that occurred because of the Nipissing survey, was the continuation of the Rosseau-Nipissing Colonization Road. The road was part of a series of roads built to open up the interior, before the adjacent land was surveyed into townships. It’s starting point was the town of Rosseau at Parry Sound District’s extreme south, and the end point was supposed to be the village of Nipissing. When the surveyors of the road met the boundary of Nipissing, they had to chart a new path to the north, and so the colonization road is disjointed at the Gurd and Nipissing boundary (it was seemless for nearly its entirely). While the road was pushed through across lots already surveyed in Nipissing, and some sections in other townships having fallen into disrepair, half of the distance in Nipissing fell to the same fate. It was none-the-less an extremely important road in opening up East Parry Sound and points beyond.
Patterson is at what is the beginning of what can be called, and not offensively, being separated by distance from the Highway 11/CN corridor. It’s mammoth size encumbered it, and while it’s extensions are not populated by any permanent residents, there is still the illusion that it is much too large (Patterson’s populated area is contained to what should have been southeast quadrant, and thus it is not unfathomable to conceive it becoming organized).
Had Himsworth not been given the extra 5 lots along its eastern edge, the town site of Callander would have been in South (East) Ferris, which is neither here nor there, but would have presented an interesting dynamic. This would have left North Himsworth with an actual exclave on the north shore of Callander Bay, a chunk of land around the Cranberry Bog, that most likely would have been given as an extension to either North (West) or South (East) Ferris. The portion of the South Shore belonging to Nipissing would have been in possession of North Himsworth. As well, had North and South Himsworth been made of equal size, the boundary between the two townships would have been along Lindquist Line, just north of the town of Powassan (which would have presented another interesting dynamic).
If you are wondering where the townships should have met up, where the four corners should have been, the answer is Christian Valley, on the line between lots 10 and 11 and concessions VI and VII of Nipissing. This falls right on Highway 534, 440 yards east of Stillar Sideroad and 440 yards west of the intersection with Armstrong Road, the centre line of Highway 534 and a line drawn between the fences that separate lots 10 and 11 would be the exact spot. Instead the townships meet up at a series of three corner intersections, nearly all found deep in the bush.
One of the more humorous parts about the surveying error is that most people who find themselves living in Nipissing’s portion of the South Shore often affiliate themselves with Callander (North Himsworth), the jurisdiction with who they should have been part of, and the same can be said about Nipissing’s southeast area being affiliated with Powassan. As for Gurd, the southeastern half has always felt more closely partnered with Trout Creek (part of South Himsworth), the southwest with itself in the hamlet of Commanda and by extension neighbouring Pringle Township, and the panhandle being closely affiliated with Restoule (Patterson). However, Gurd has had to heed to the hegemony of Nipissing since annexation.
I hope you enjoyed my deductions and anecdotes.
No comments:
Post a Comment