MUST THE COTTAGES GO? October 1973 by Ralph Bice

I did attend a meeting in Huntsville when the powers that be apparently just wanted to talk about getting the logging and cottagers out of Algonquin Park. I have had a lease since 1930. My latest renewal makes it one of the last to go. I will be pushing up daisies long before the lease expires but even the Park as I knew it has long gone it would be nice to think my grandchildren could enjoy some of what I remember.

It is the cottages on the three main lakes, Cache, Smoke and Tea that I get to thinking about. There are cottages on other lakes but these are the main ones. I spent many summers on those lakes. In fact I built quite a few of the cottages on Cache Lake, also one on Smoke Lake. Many of these cottages have been there a long time. In fact grandchildren of the original owners are using those cottages in some cases. They do little harm to the wildlife or fish and they do have a good sized investment. There are a few built since the road came in but the first cottages were built by material shipped in by train. Then this material had to be taken across the lake on two canoes. This was in the days before motor boats so it meant a lot of work. Very few of the people who had leases on Cache Lake were what has come to be known as “moneyed people”.

The cottages had to have a certain value but that could be covered by a small building. The lease rental then was not high and people came because they had spent a summer there and wanted to come every year. Cottages were not too plentiful until after World War One but by 19130 most of the sites had been taken. In fact some were much closer than would now be permitted.

The first lease on Cache Lake, and it may have been the first one granted in the Park, was to a minister from New Jersey. That was in 1908. Like many others he just used a large tent but he did know where he would be staying each summer. After the war in 1919 cottages on these campsites appeared and then there was a general increase in building cottages. The first load of lumber that came in on a truck was for a boat house on a spot called then Pine Point.

On Cache Lake anyone who wanted a site just picked his or her spot and then it was marked on the map. The result was that some cottages were quite close. In 1923 the Department had the shores of Canoe, Tea and Smoke Lakes surveyed, as they thought correctly that there would be a demand for places to build summer cottages. Even at that a lot of the material had to still be put off the train at Canoe Lake followed by a long paddle or tow to Smoke Lake before the road.

It was in the mid fifties that an edict was issued that cottages would eventually be moved out of the Park. The department was ready to buy back any improvements that had been made and these cottages were then torn down or in some cases burned. To many it was an out. Their families had grown and the cottage was not the summer place it had been. So they were willing to accept a cash settlement. But to others the Park was still where they wanted to spend their summers. They had kept their hopes alive with the thought that before the end did come the Department would have a change of mind. But it seems that this was not to be.

An organization was formed some years ago called the Leaseholders Ass’n and for a few years I was a member though I was never able to get to a meeting. Some of us had the feeling there was a lot of wasted time and too much time given to elaborate plans. The association is quite active now making a last stand but it may be too late.

At Huntsville I asked why the cottages had to go when the summer camps and the stands along the road would be allowed to remain. The answer, and this one was from Steven Lewis, was that it was showing favouritism to allow some to have cottages in the Park when there was not room for everyone.

Years ago, when it took a lot of hard work to have a summer place there, no one seemed to mind. Now when access is so easy it is not a bit fair that those who have had a place to spend the summer for so long will have to go.

There is no reason to move the cottages. At least none have been given so far. We must remember that the committee set up to make plans for the park was made up of people who had little if any knowledge of the Park, or the arguments of the cottagers. True, there was one man from Smoke Lake on the committee but you can be certain he did not vote to remove the cottages. But the rest of the committee, some of them I know quite well, had never visited the Park and many of us think should not have been in a position to make plans for a section of the world they knew so little about. It would not be so bad if there was to be a clean sweep. Move out everything, loggers, summer camps, perhaps even close the road, and make it a real wilderness. But to call it everyman’s wilderness when only the cottages have to go is a bit far fetched.

At the Huntsville meeting quite a lot was made of a statement by a young man who said his grandfather had given up his cottage. I believe that the cottage was purchased by the Department as have quite a few others.

Compared to the many people who have cottages in Ontario the number in the Park is small. I have been told that one group who have cottages in the northern section intend to take the matter to court.  Perhaps this last effort by the Leaseholders will help. But it looks like the next generation or the one following will not be seeing cottages in the Park. It would be very nice if someone would tell us a good reason why.