Canada: Ontario / Quebec / Ottawa / Geography / Communities Start‑class High‑importance

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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario. This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec. This article is supported by WikiProject Ottawa (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada. This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

There are some significant errors. In fact, the NCR is not an unofficial designation...it only came into use, I believe, because of the federal government's use of the term, which is currently defined in the National Capital Act in extremely precise terms. It does not correspond to the Census Metropolitan Area. I was attempting to work it in to the article, but it required more work than I have time for this morning. (I couldn't just drop it in, without leaving the article contradicting itself.) I meant to put the paragraph I was working on here, but in the process of gathering links, etc., I managed to lose it from both my web browser and the clipboard. - Cafemusique 13:20, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I added the CMA info because of the way many of the American agglomeration pages are set up, not to mention a few Canadian ones as well: (Namely a general term for an urban area given to be the informal name of the CMA) Earl Andrew 03:27, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Maybe I'm not understanding the distinction that Earl Andrew is making. The NCR is not an "informal designation" - it's an official government designation, and precisely defined by statute. I do not believe that it should be referred to as informal, because it is anything but. I have no idea what the official term Statscan uses for the CMA, and maybe the term NCR is used to refer to what is officially the Ottawa-Gatineau CMA, but that doesn't render the NCR "informal" -- it simply means that people are mixing up two very distinct concepts. Skeezix1000 21:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I removed the location grid because it was inaccurate (for example, New York state is not adjacent to the southern boundary of the NCR). If I have time, I will insert the correct information, and add the grid back to the article. --Skeezix1000 12:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• This comment didn't seem right to me - what about Lloydminster, which straddles AB/SK border? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.187.67 (talk) 07:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lloydminster isn't a metropolitan area. The definition of a metropolitan area requires a minimum population of 100,000 people; Lloydminster just barely has about a quarter of that. Bearcat (talk) 02:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article advises that the NCR’s land area is 5,319 km² and its population is 1,451,415, and advises the Ottawa–Gatineau CMA’s population is 1,130,761. Statistics Canada's 2006 census confirms the CMA population presented in the article. The 2006 census also advises that the CMA’s land area is 5,716 km².

Can anyone advise how the NCR has a greater population than the Ottawa–Gatineau CMA despite the NCR being smaller in land area than the CMA? I don’t doubt this is possible as this could be done by adding an amount of more-densely populated urban areas just outside the CMA to the NCR, while removing a greater amount of less-densely populated rural areas from the CMA to arrive at a final land area for the NCR that is smaller than the CMA’s land area.

Does anyone have a link to a map that shows the boundaries of the NCR to bring clarity to this observation? Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 04:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is odd. I never realized that. Clearly the NCR is larger than Ottawa-Gatineau, and not smaller. It should be changed asap. I found a map of the National Capital Region, and a few outdated stats. UrbanNerd (talk) 03:10, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The map and stats you provided are of what appears to be the Greater Ottawa Gatineau Metropolitan Area (GOGMA) as defined by the City of Ottawa, but not the actual defined NCR. The map shows the GOGMA is significantly larger than the Ottawa-Gatineau Census Metropolitan Area (OGCMA) defined by StatCan. Without a legend, I'm not sure why some areas (presumed municipalities) are coloured pink while others are simply white. Any ideas?

I'm curious to see a map of the NCR as defined by the federal legislation – the National Capital Act – that created the NCR. A legal description of the NCR is provided in the Schedule attached to the Act. However, I've yet to find a map that visually translates this lengthy legal description.

What I also see here is that the National Capital Commission (NCC) appears to advise that the size of the NCR to be 4,715 km², which is 11% smaller than the area of the NCR according to the article and 18% smaller than the area of the OGCMA. This third different delineation of the region's extents makes this matter even more confusing.

Other observations about this article include the NCR's population of 1,451,415 is unreferenced (also unreferenced at Ottawa) and the referenced estimated population of 1,500,000 comes from the Canadian International Hockey Academy (CIHA) website. Per WP:CANSTYLE#Population, all population figures must be referenced, and properly sourced intercensal population estimates from a government sources, such as Statistics Canada or a provincial statistical agency, may be provided. A private hockey boarding school isn't a government entity. Therefore, its own estimate of the region's population is likely not reliable.

I'm going to put a Citation needed tag on the 1,451,415 estimate for now. I think we should remove the sentence with the CIHA population estimate altogether. Hwy43 (talk) 04:42, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for citing the 1,451,415 population. Any headway on the uncited area?

Also, thoughts on deleting the estimate made by a private hockey school? Hwy43 (talk) 14:28, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's proving to be hard to find material. The government doesn't seem to release many maps or articles on non-cma areas (NCR, GTA, Golden Horseshoe, etc.) Especially ones that fall into two Provincial, and one Federal jurisdiction. I'll keep looking tho. As for the hockey school ref, I wouldn't delete it. Any ref is a good ref in my opinion. But I'm indifferent either way.

Also I thought the Greater Ottawa-Gatineau Metropolitan Area (GOGMA) and The National Capital Region (NCR) were synonyms. UrbanNerd (talk) 14:44, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: private hockey school reference... I agree with the rule of thumb that generally most references are good references, but in this case WP:CANSTYLE suggests that referenced population estimates should be from a government source. This estimate not being from such a source, the estimate can be viewed as questionnable. From a different perspective, I reviewed the article's history. A cite request was originally made for the 1,451,415 population estimate in April. In August, an attempt to validate the estimate was made by adding the hockey school reference, without fully satisfying the cite request for the estimate in question. Now that you have found the originally requested reference for the estimate in question, the hockey school estimate is no longer needed to attempt validation of the estimate that was in question. Thanks for expressing your indifference to its removal. I just wanted to add this as additional information in support of its removal.

Re: GOGMA = NCR... I researched this earlier today and it appears they aren't synonomous. I'll provide the results when I've had a chance to digest it all. Also in this research, I may have found an map of the NCR and have confirmed the NCR's area. More to come! Hwy43 (talk) 04:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So what I’ve learned from today’s research is as follows:

• the National Capital Commission (NCC) oversees the National Capital Region (NCR);
• both the NCC and NCR are defined by the federal government through the National Capital Act (NCA);
• in two locations, the NCC refers to the area of the NCR as 4,715 km² (see here and here);
• in various locations on the NCC website, the NCC synonymously refers to the NCR as Canada’s Capital Region;
• the NCC estimated the NCR’s population to be 1.081 million as of 2000;
• the Ottawa–Gatineau Census Metropolitan Area (OGCMA) had a 2001 population and area of 1,067,800 and 5,716 km² respectively;
• the City of Ottawa recognizes a Greater Ottawa-Gatineau Metropolitan Area (GOGMA) and estimated its population at 1,302,055 at the end of 2005; and
• a map shows that the GOGMA is significantly larger than the OGCMA, which is 5,716 km² in area per above.

Observations based on the above:

• despite the NCR being smaller in area than the CMA, the NCC’s estimated population of the NCR in 2000 is within reasonable range of the CMA’s 2001 population – a difference of 13,200 people;
• the undated NCR population estimate of 1,451,415 is significantly higher than the CMA’s 2006 population of 1,130,761 – a difference of 320,654 people;
• the undated NCR population estimate of 1,451,415 is 149,360 people higher than the City of Ottawa’s end-of-2005 GOGMA population estimate 1,302,055; and
• an estimated growth of 149,360 people in the GOGMA between 2005 and 2009 (or 2010) seems plausible.

Questions:

• Is it possible that the population estimate of 1,451,415 is actually a post-2005 population of the significantly larger GOGMA?
• Is it possible that the NCR and GOGMA are often referred to being synonymous with each other, despite the former actually being significantly smaller than the latter?

Hypothesis:

• The 1,451,415 population estimate is of the GOGMA, or a colloquial Greater National Capital Region and not the actual NCR as defined by the federal government through the NCA and overseen by the NCC.

NCR Map:

• I also have found an actual map of the NCR difficult to find on the web. However, I did find this map. Ignore the main map at this link, but zoom into the inset map in the lower-right corner. This inset map is entitled NCR Overview. Without a legend for the inset map, what the outer green boundary represents is not confirmed. However, the inset map’s title implies that the outer green boundary represents the actual boundary of the NCR. Hwy43 (talk) 19:16, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could see the NCR's population including commuter cities and towns in Renfrew County, Lanark County, and Prescott-Russell County while excluding the mostly rural areas South of Ottawa. That would explain the smaller area and larger population. Whatever the case the gov't does not seem to release many articles on the subject. UrbanNerd (talk) 23:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I crunched some numbers based on the possibility you expressed. By adding the 2006 populations of all the incorporated cities and towns (as well as the one village) within the three suggested counties, another 121,414 people would be added to the 2006 CMA population before deducting the mostly rural areas from the CMA south of Ottawa as you suggested. This results in a total of 1,252,175 people (199,240 short of 1,451,415) before the deduction.

Based on this, it appears the 1,451,415 population is derived from a significantly larger geographic area than the NCR as defined by the National Capital Act. Without knowing what municipalities are within the geographic area associated with this regional population figure, the figure isn’t accurate based on how the balance of the article describes the geography of the region. The 1,451,415 population certainly doesn’t represent the 5,319 km² region defined by the National Capital Act.

Adding the populations of the numerous communities listed under the Other towns within National Capital Region section for a total population of 1,218,720 would better represent how the article describes the geography of the region. Hwy43 (talk) 05:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The population figure is a referenced stat. The region includes cities and towns in Quebec as well. If you take the population of Ottawa, and the counties that border it (Prescott-Russel, SDG, Leeds-Grenville, Lanark, Renfrew, and The Outaouais) the population equals 1,610,462. Obviously the region includes most population centres of these counties. UrbanNerd (talk) 13:36, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right it is referenced and we've covered that previously (although looking back at the sourced article, I now see the Ottawa Kiosk is not government-based as previously thought, but actually an advertising web page maintained by Canoe Inc. of Quebecor Media).

Based on the information you’ve provided, it appears you are in agreement that: the NCR is more than just the NCR defined by the feds; and this larger variant of the NCR includes the CMA as well as certain lands from outside the CMA in order to arrive at an estimated population of 1.451 million. Correct?

If so, I will make some revisions to reconcile area/population discrepancies in the article's intro. Note that I have no intention to remove the referenced population of 1.451 million people in these forthcoming revisions. Hwy43 (talk) 02:49, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should leave the stats as is until we can find the proper documentation on the NCR. There has to be documents out there somewhere, I will begin the search. UrbanNerd (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The only stat I plan to change in the forthcoming revisions is removing the unreferenced area and replacing it with the referenced 4,715 km² as defined by the NCA (for the federally-defined variant of the NCR only). I won't include an area for the larger NCR variant since that information has not been found yet (hopefully you'll come across it). Hwy43 (talk) 16:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair. I'm not sure why documents are so scarce on the subject, but hopefully I will find something. UrbanNerd (talk) 16:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It could be because the larger variant of the NCR is a local colloquialism that has not been formally defined to date. Hwy43 (talk) 16:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm, perhaps. UrbanNerd (talk) 20:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken a stab at establishing the two variants of the NCR in the intro and reconciled the geographic areas of each as discussed above. Since the intro now establishes and distinguishes the two NCR variants, some of the other content in the previous intro no longer fit or flowed well. Therefore, I placed this content into separate sections and re-ordered all the sections below into the most logical sequence that I could muster at this time. Please peer review the intro and look at the ordering to determine if there is an even more logical sequence that can be established. It is difficult to determine the best location for Capital district proposals since it is unknown if such proposals were associated with the federally designated NCR, the larger NCR, the CMA, or some other geographic variant. Hwy43 (talk) 04:53, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find this term is not neutral, as the term is rather vague, and means something different to different people. Many who grew up in Ottawa pre-amalgamation (such as myself, as I have lived in Ottawa all 26 years of my life) consider Ottawa's west end to be very different than someone who has lived here only post amalgamation. I think using "Kanata" is the best way of going about identifying where Scotiabank Place is. Sure, Kanata is no longer a municipality, but it's not like it has disappeared from the map. Everyone still refers to the area as Kanata, not "West Ottawa" or the "west end". -- Earl Andrew - talk 12:00, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I lived in pre-amalgamation Ottawa for 20 years (Alta Vista, Westboro and Kanata), and routinely used "west end" to refer to Kanata, and my family still uses it to refer to Kanata. However, I agree with you, Earl, that it is vague and its use is often dependent on context (in a conversation I could just as easily be referring to Westboro, depending on what I was talking about). I agree with the compromise that you put forward, whereby we refer to Scotiabank Place being in the western suburb of Kanata, or in the community of Kanata in Ottawa's west-end, or something to that effect. I believe that should address both your concern, as well as UrbanNerd's, and should be clear to the reader. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to make it clear, that I do not deny people refer to Kanata as being in the west end, but the problem is it's an ambiguous term in post amalgamation Ottawa. For example, Kanata is nowhere near the neighbourhood of Ottawa West or the "Ottawa West" (read: Non-Nepean) part of the riding of Ottawa West-Nepean. -- Earl Andrew - talk 13:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it's ambiguous. But disagree it had a lot to do with amalgamation. People were referring to Kanata as the city's west end when I was a kid (even before there was such thing as Kanata, and before I even lived there). And I am not sure people used West Ottawa and West end interchangeably. I am not sure there are clear rules of usage, which underlines the point that usage is unclear and that your compromise is a good one. Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:36, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The West End lies west of Downtown, but east of Kanata....Got to remember that for decades Ottawa was divided up by east - west - south all inside the Greenbelt. For the younger generation the Greenbelt is no longer the main boundary and they may refer the Kanata - Stitsville - Carp as the west end of the city. But historically the west end is inside the greenbelt. Just like how North Gloucester (Beacon hill - Blackburn hamlet) is the est end not the other side of the greenbelt like Orleans. When i was very young - Vanier, Rockcliffe Park and New Edinburgh was the west end...as the other more east were in different cites.Moxy (talk) 14:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"But historically the west end is inside the greenbelt" - maybe before Kanata was built, but otherwise I don't think anyone can say this conclusively. Frankly my recollection is quite different. I think all this does is emphasize the point that the term is vague, and has been used differently by different people in different contexts - which is basically Earl's original point.Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correct Kanata is very very very modern - There was no urban development before the mid 1960s in Kanata - was not till 1978 that it became a city. So to say historically is accurate as Kanata was just farm land till the late 21st century. Tony Hill (1 September 2002). Canadian Politics, Riding by Riding: An In-Depth Analysis of Canada's 301 Federal Electoral Districts. Prospect Park Press. p. 193. ISBN 978-0-9723436-0-2. The west end of Ottawa gives way to Nepean, which is barely twenty years old but vaulted past Gatineau and Gloucester to become the second largest city in greater Ottawa-Hull before it was combined with Ottawa .... All that said I agree today the term is more obscured. Just need to say this.Moxy (talk) 17:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is very interesting that a fairly innocuous issue, the usage of the term "west end", has generated so many comments. People feel strongly about these things. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:27, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard anyone refer to ottawa's "west end" as west of downtown, but east of Kanata. Anything in the urban area west of downtown is the "west end", even Stittsville. UrbanNerd (talk) 17:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a matter of age I guess - for us older timers it was the norm to say to the west of downtown was west Ottawa (Old Ottawa West) - List of neighbourhoods in Ottawa#West end . This is not a big deal just need to explain that as the city grew so did the meaning of the west end - As sourced above.Moxy (talk) 17:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree, UrbanNerd. But why is the compromise language that Earl inserted a problem? Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:27, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If no one objects, I will revert to my last edit after 24 hours of discussion have passed. I think we have reached a consensus, and UrbanNerd hasn't provided any reason why my compromise is a problem, only that he happens to have never heard anyone refer to Ottawa West, Westboro, etc as the "west end". (not sure how long he's even lived in Ottawa???) -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:43, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No objection.Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So because you're old and not with the times we use your out-of-date terms ? Awesome. Great editing guys. UrbanNerd (talk) 02:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you want to go personal with this, then I must ask, I see from your profile that you're a resident of many different cities, so how well can you even know Ottawa? How long have you lived here? If it's only since amalgamation, then you can only have a post-amalgamation mindset, which is only the experience of a minority of Ottawans. And for the record, I'm 26, so it's strange that you would say I am "old and not with the times". -- Earl Andrew - talk 12:22, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For starters I was responding to Moxy calling himself an "old-timer". Secondly I've lived in Ottawa for many years and I can assure you I know much more about the city, it's demographics, neighbourhoods, history, etc. than most, including most of you. I think the original research on what constitutes what on here is shameful and very non-encyclopaedic. UrbanNerd (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on this topic is just as much original research as our view. Except our view admits that there are many differing opinions as to what equates the west end, which isn't really original research, in that it is backed up with references (as provided by Moxy, for example). Your view that the west end (what I call the west end) is apparently never called the west end is actually what is original research, because it is an opinion, and an incorrect one at that. I still have no idea how long you have lived in Ottawa, but it musn't have been very long, if you have never heard the west end being referred to as such. Again, it must be a post-amalgamation mindset (again, you are not denying my assumption that you did not live hear prior to amalgamation). I find that if you think that the west end is never referred to as such, it is highly unlikely that you know "much more" about the city, it's demographics, etc than ANY of us, or at least me, a person who again has lived here his entire life, and has spent much of that time immersed in the city's demographics, neighbourhoods and history, etc. Obviously your view that the west end is not called as such is incorrect, because not only myself, but 2 other users are familiar with it being used, but you apparently are the only one who disagrees. And I would certainly think an "old-timer" would know more about local colloquialisms than someone with a post-amalgamation mindset such as yourself. I wish that you would just resign to the fact that you could possibly be wrong about this instead of resorting to personal attacks. -- Earl Andrew - talk 15:43, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you pal that I have lived in Ottawa for MANY years. How many is completely non of your business, but it is more than your 26 years on this earth. I also have studied the city formally for years. So I can assure you I do in fact know this city better than most, including you. So your opinion of me is irrelevant and i could really care less. Your out of date "inner-greenbelt" mentality at looking at the city as if it was 1988 and you were 65 years old is laughable. The city is living and constantly changing, sticking with one definition from 25+ years ago is foolish. You changed the long-standing to YOUR original research. It wasn't "my" original research as your claim. Either way, this is a very minor edit, and not that important. UrbanNerd (talk) 16:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]