I gave a presentation as part of the Maskwacis Cultural College’s micro learning opportunities today. It provides a general overview of some of my research and reflects on the value of this kind of research. Here is the video:
Case Study: Employment Programs as Cultural Policy
The Canadian and provincial/territorial governments have employment programs. These programs provide funding to hire someone to work on a project or fill a need for a short amount of time, targeting youth, students, and/or regions with high unemployment.
Federal examples include Canada Summer Jobs and Young Canada Works. I provide a larger list of employment programs that the Dawson City Museum has accessed here.
These employment programs are one of the most significant forms of support that community museums receive from the federal and, sometimes, provincial governments. They subsidize the labor museums desperately need.
As such, this post argues these employment programs are implicit cultural policies.
The first section contains YouTube videos from Employment and Social Development Canada that demonstrate the argument. The second section summarizes my findings about the provincial employment program and community museums in New Brunswick (Nelson 2015). The third section asks questions because I would love to hear what you think.
Canada Summer Jobs Advertisements
Employment and Social Development Canada created videos that demonstrate the Canada Summer Jobs (CSJ) program has an influence on cultural organizations.
Here is a video that describes the importance of CSJ from both the youth and museum perspective:
Here is another video that describes a link to theatre, showing the program has significance to different cultural subsectors:
New Brunswick Employment Programs and Community Museums
Background
In New Brunswick, the government began providing funding for student employment in community museums in 1971. As I wrote in my thesis:
By the summer of 1979, the HRA [Historical Resource Administration] facilitated fifty student positions, increasing provincially financed student employment in museums and historical societies by thirty-two positions over eight years. In 2014, SEED funded a total of 102 student employees or 947 weeks in New Brunswick community museums and historical societies.
Nelson 2015, 57
Importantly, many of these museums had one or no paid staff year round. As such, one or two student employees represented a significant increase to museums’ human resources.
The Effects on Community Museums
Here are some of my key findings about this provincial program and its effect on community museums:
- Student employees enabled museums to open.
Some museum volunteers in New Brunswick believed they would be unable to open their museum without student employees. Supporting this assertion, when museums opened for the summer or extended their hours often reflected the number of weeks provided through student employment.
- Student employees enabled museums to offer programming.
Tours were (are?) a major form of programming in NB and student employees provided these tours. More interestingly, exhibitions in historic houses have developed with the assumption that students will be present to supervise visitors, meaning barriers between visitors and objects were not necessary.
- Rural community museums struggled to fill the positions, which placed additional time / human resource burdens on the volunteers (or the one employee) attempting to find eligible people.
There are simply fewer students available in rural settings than in cities, making positions more difficult to fill at rural museums.
- Museums did not know whether they would have employees or how many until the season was about to start, which made long-term planning, advertising for public programming, and hiring more difficult.
In other words, how the employment program was administered effected how the museums could plan and develop. Rural museums, in particular, found the late notification exacerbated their struggles to find local students.
- The employed students often changed every year, leading to inconsistencies and lowering the quality of museum work.
For example, one interview participant described inconsistencies in their collections management because when the student engaged in this work changed, differences were introduced.
- The provincial contracts were 8-10 weeks, which is the length of the summer season. As such, there was little time for training.
The lack of time for training changed what the museums could accomplish because it takes time to learn about a regions’ history and heritage.
Questions
Have you ever accessed a student employment program as either a student or employer? What do you think?
Do you agree that these programs are one of the most significant form of implicit cultural policy within what is now known as Canada? Why or why not?
Case Study: National Museum Policies Timeline, 1970s
Last updated: October 18, 2021
As part of the Dawson City Museum Project, I am creating timelines of the Museum’s development in relation to government policy and community action (1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s).
The 1970s were significant in the development of an explicit community museum policy and a significant implicit community museum policy (student employment policy) at the federal level. As such, I am considering these timelines separately and with greater detail. These timelines are a work in progress – please let me know if you think anything important is missing!
Explicit Museum Policy
1970:
June: Cabinet approved a cultural policy.
August – September: The Secretary of State, Gérard Pelletier, represented Canada at the UNESCO Intergovernmental Conference in Venice, studying cultural policies.
There was wide agreement, however, on two essential tasks that governments must take responsibility for: the adequate financing and proper planning of cultural institutions and programs.
Final Report: Venice, 24 August – 2 September 1970September: The Canada Conference of the Arts held a National Conference on Cultural Policy.
Screenshot of the Conference schedule, showing Pelletier’s talk. Pelletier, spoke at the Conference about the federal cultural policy (objectives = democratization, decentralization, pluralism, federal-provincial cooperation and international cooperation). He received many requests to consult on policy, leading to planned consultations (Pelletier 1971; Source).
1971:
February: Cabinet approved Pelletier’s proposed museum policy in principle. The policy was most concerned with circulating the National Museum’s collections (Privy Council’s Office, 1971).
Efforts to bring collections which constitute part of the national heritage to the notice of the general public have been largely inadequate. The museums, including the National Museums, tend to emphasize the preservation of this heritage to the neglect of the public. For this reason, priority must be given, at least temporarily, to relations between the museums and the public.
Cabinet Document No. 27-71; Translated Summary of the memorandum to cabinet: Cultural policy with regard to museums and the national heritageFebruary 14-16: Pelletier held a conference on the role of museums in the 1970s – CONSULTATION I: Museums 70+ Conference.
Screenshots from the CMA’s October Gazette October: The Canadian Museums Association (CMA) circulated excerpts from Pelletier’s presentation at CONSULTATION I to the museum community through the Gazette with the CMA’s responding brief.
1972:
March 28: Pelletier announced a National Museums Policy (objectives: democratization and decentralization), leading to the:
- Museums Assistance Program
- Canadian Conservation Institute
- National Inventory (now the Canadian Heritage Information Network)
April: The CMA circulated the policy in their Gazette.
1973: The National Museum Policy: A Program for Canadian Museums provided a comprehensive description of the new policy’s components:
- Associate Museums: A network of museums meeting certain standards and engaged in programming beyond their institution (e.g., demonstrating “regional initiative”).
The Royal Ontario Museum was an associate museum in Ontario (copyright information) - Special Grants: A fund to help museums achieve higher standards so they can receive better exhibits.
- Exhibition Centres: Capital funding to help institutions meet standards so they can become National Exhibition Centres, displaying the National Museums’ collections.
- Training Assistance: Funding to increase the number of trained individuals.
- National Loan Collection: Collection of materials designed for public use in non museum situations.
- Emergency Purchase Fund: A fund to purchase nationally significant materials at risk of being sold abroad.
- Canadian Conservation Institute: They planned five regional conservation laboratories with headquarters in Ottawa.
- National Inventory of Collections: A computerized data bank of all major collections.
- Catalogue Assistance: Support to help a museum prepare for eventual inclusion in the inventory.
A National Museums of Canada poster about the Museumobiles program (copyright information) - Museumobiles: Traveling museums on wheels from the National Museums.
1975: International Programme created to facilitate international exchanges of exhibitions.
1978: As part of austerity measures, the National Museums of Canada budget receives a significant budget cut (OMA 1978/1979).
Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI)
The Canadian Conservation Institute originated as the National Conservation Research Laboratory within the National Gallery of Canada in the 1960s.
1972: The National Conservation Research Laboratory split from the National Gallery of Canada and becomes the Canadian Conservation Institute (source).
The Director of the CCI went on a recruiting campaign in Europe to find specialist staff (Stolow 1973).
1973: The Pacific Conservation Centre was established in Vancouver with three conservators specializing in archaeology/ethnology, works of art on paper, and paintings.
The Province (Vancouver, BC), January 18, 1974. p. 29. The Conservator Training Program was established to increase the number of conservators in Canada.
The CCI conduced a survey of museums in the Atlantic provinces, finding a significant need for conservation work. They also conducted a survey in British Columbia, finding the conservation needs great and urgent (CCI 1976).
The CCI offered scientific services through the Conservation Research Division at Headquarters, including (Sebra 1973):
- Consultative Services
- Analytical Services
- Scanning Electron Microscope
1974:
June: The Atlantic regional laboratory was established in Moncton with conservators specializing in fine arts, paper conservation or attracts. There were plans to open a larger facility at the local university by 1978 (CCI 1976).
The CCI’s training program began.
The Province (Vancouver, BC), June 1, 1974, p. 1. 1975: The CCI created an exhibition of recently restored works (Duncan 1975).
The Gazette, August 12, 1975, p. 27. The CCI began searching for directors for regional labs in Ontario and Quebec.
1976: Brian Arthur was hired as the Director and he implements changes in the organization (Click here for a podcast interview with Arthur from CCI and CHIN: In Our Own Words).
Arthur reorganizes the CCI to make a better use of available resource through the integration of conservation research and services (CCI 1976).
The CCI opened a permanent exhibition – A Future for our Past (Walker 1976).
1977: A small facility opened in Quebec.
The Pacific Conservation Centre released a report about the poor condition of museums in BC and Yukon. If you have access to this report – contact me! I would like to read it 🙂
A mobile conservation services was proposed to the NMC’s Board of Trustees, but postponed due to a lack of resources (McCawley and Ward 1980).
1979: The Regional Centers closed following financial cuts to the CCI (McCawley and Ward 1980).
The NMC commissioned Anne Lambert to study the conservation needs across what is now known as Canada (Mitchols 1979).
The Silver Lining: A Plan for the Future is released.
Mobile Labs start as a 2.5 month pilot project (Arthur 1980). The project is seen as an “unqualified success” (OMA 1979/1980).
The CCI began lending an Environment Monitoring Kit for two to three week periods (Lafountaine 1980).
Museums Assistance Program (MAP)
1972: In its first year, organizations could apply for funding in the following categories (source – an example of newsletters providing great information):
- Associate Museums
Screenshot of The Grande New Dawson and Hind Quarterly Epistle. Vol No. 4, September 1972 (source) - Special Grants: A $1.5 million fund to allow smaller museums to upgrade their staff and facilities so they may become eligible to be an associate museum.
- National Exhibition Centre: A $750,000 fund for Centres that did not have their own collections but could form a complimentary network to the associate museums in order to display exhibitions from the National Museums.
- Catalogue Assistance: A $300,000 fund for organizations that want to catalogue their collections using procedures suggested for the National Inventory.
- Training Assistance: A $500,000 fund to increase the number of trained personelle in what is now known as Canada.
- Emergency Purchase Fund: A $1 million dollar fund so museums can purchase objects of national significance threatened with sales to other countries.
- Canadian Conservation Institute: While it was being established, there was a $1.65 million fund for the restoration of works in urgent need of attention.
1974: Funding provided in the following categories (Morrison 1974):
Core funding:
- Associate Museums
Project funding:
- Special Grants
- National Exhibition Centres (for renovations and additions)
- Training Assistance
- Cataloguing Assistance
- Emergency Fund
1975: The Consultative Committee (formed to advise the NMC on the National Museum Policy’s financial assistance) engages in a revision of the financial programs (Proonovost 1975)
The application approval process is updated with greater emphasis on provincial consultation (Nichols 1979).
They develop a new structure described as follows (source):
- Core-funding assistance: Grants of up to $3.3 million to institutions already designated as Associate Museums or National Exhibition Centres.
- Associate Museums
- National Exhibition Centres
- Capital Assistance Program: Financial support and technical assistance for capital projects that will enable public programming or increase access to cultural heritage.
- Special Activities Assistance Program: This continued to be a catch all kind of program “designed to provide financial, informational and coordinative assistance to non-profit organizations seeking to undertake specifically defined projects of a special, experimental, innovative, managerial, or informational nature that meet the intent and requirements of the Nation Museum Policy” (Source, 2).
- Training Assistance
- Core-funding assistance: Grants of up to $3.3 million to institutions already designated as Associate Museums or National Exhibition Centres.
1978: The National Museums Corporation (NMC) recommends the establishment of a specialized museums program because specialized collections were not receiving “satisfactory attention” (OMA 1978).
The NMC engaged in consultation on the Associate Museums Programme because (NMC 1978):
- After six years, a real network still did not exist.
- There was no clear articulation of Associate Museum’s purpose, role and responsibilities within the network.
- Designated institutions were diverse with little standardization.
- Federal vs. provincial responsibilities were unclear.
The Council of Associate Museum Directors approved the resulting “Preliminary Plan for the Associate Museum Programme” in October and then by the National Museums Corporation’s Board of Trusties in December (Clark, 1979).
At this time, MAP included both core (operational) and project funding:
Core Funding Assistance:
- Associate Museums
- National Exhibition Centres
Project funding:
- Capital Assistance
- Special Activities Assistance
- Training Assistance
- Registration Assistance
Implicit Museum Policy – Employment Programs
Job programs in what is now known as Canada have typically aimed to: reduce cyclical unemployment, target a disadvantaged labour force (e.g., youth), relieve regional or structural unemployment, and produce something or provide a service of social value (Roy and Wong 2000). Museums are often well positioned to take advantage of these programs because they generally have a significant need for additional human resources to complete even basic museum activities, which arguably are of social value.
1970s: Baby boomers were entering the workforce looking for jobs, causing an increase in the youth unemployment rate (Roy and Wong 2000).
1971: The federal government establishes the Local Initiatives Program (LIP) to create jobs with an emphasis on areas where de-industrialization caused high unemployment (source). Originally, half of the 100 million budget was allocated to fund private projects working toward better communities. The other half was allocated to municipal government projects in consultation with provinces. Additional funding went to private projects, increasing the budget to about $180 million (Blake 1976).
1972: LIP begins with a $85 million budget, but once again there are increases that raise the total expenditures to around $235 million (Blake 1976).
LIP is criticized as part of the 1972 election (Blake 1976).
1974: The LIP budget is reduced to $73 million (Blake 1976) and then continues to experience cuts.
1976: Employment Strategy announced (Keck 1995)
1977: LIP is terminated (with a 47 million budget in 1977-1978 – source).
The federal government announces Canada Works and Young Canada Works to create jobs with a budget of $300 million (source). The main difference was YCW targeted youth with summer jobs and CW provided up to 52 weeks, targeting areas of high unemployment (Roy and Wong 2000).
1979: The 1979-1980 Canada Works program restricted to provinces where unemployment was 9% or greater (OMA 1979a)
Questions
I have a feeling there is a lot missing! What else would you add? Is there an area you think needs more information?
Resources
Arthur, Brian. 1980, January. “CCI Mobile Laboratory Service.” F2091 15 B253022 CCI OAC. Archives of Ontario.
Blake, Donald. 1976. “LIP and Partisanship: An Analysis of the Local Initiatives Program.” Canadian Public Policy. Vol. 2 (2): 17-32.
CCI. 1976. The Journal of the Canadian Conservation Institute. Vol. 1.
Clark, Ian. 1979, January. “Letter to Robert Johnson.” Rg47-50_1 NMC programme correspondence. Archives of Ontario.
CMA. 1978, September. “Ottawa Report: Museum Assistance Programmes.” Museogramme. Vol. 6(6): 1.
Duncan, Elizabeth. 1975, July. “Swing and Hear a diverse exhibit.” The Ottawa Citizen. p. 63.
Lafontaine, Raymond H. “Monitoring Kit: Environmental Controls Save Artifacts.” The Journal of the Canadian Conservation Institute. Vol 4: 47-48.
McCawley, J.C. and Ward, P.R. 1980. “Regional Services: “helping museums help themselves.”” CCI: The Journal of the Canadian Conservation Institute. 4: 14-19.
Mitchols, Dann. 1979, May 23. Letter to John McAvity. F2091 15 B253022 NMC correspondence. Archives of Ontario.
Morrison, Barry. 1974. “The National Museum Policy.” Ontario Museum Association Newsletter Vol. 3 (3): 3 – 4.
Nichols, R. W. 1979, March. “Letter to Douglas Wright.” Rg47-50_1 NMC programme correspondence. Archives of Ontario.
NMC. 1978. “Towards a New Policy for the Major Museums in Canada.” F2091 15 B253022 associate museums program. Archives of Ontario.
OMA. 1978, April May. “Report Recommends New Specialized Museums in Ontario.” Currently Vol. 2(2): 1.
OMA. 1978/1979, December January. “National Museums Cut by $5 Million.” Currently Vol. 2(6): 1.
OMA. 1979a, October November. “Federal Employment Grants Cut.” Currently Vol. 3(5).
OMA. 1979b, February March. “Young Canada Works Grants.” Currently Vol. 3(1): 1.
OMA 1979/1980, December January. “First Mobile Lab – An Unqualified Success.” Currently Vol. 3(6).
Pelletier, Gerald. 1971, February. “Museums and the National Heritage: A Cultural Policy.” CCA MG28 I189 Vol 24 consultationI museums 70+ (file one). Library and Archives Canada.
Privy Council’s Office. 1971. Cultural Policy with Regard to Museums and the National Heritage. RG2, Privy Council Office, Series A-5-a, Volume 6381 Access Code: 90.
Pronovost, Pierre. 1975, April 17. Circular Letter. F2091 15 B253022 NMC correspondence. Archives of Ontario.
Sebra, K. 1973, October. “Scientific Services.” Newsletter 1: 4.
Stolow, N. 1973, April 3. Report of the Director. RG47-51 B328429 canadian conservation institute. Archives of Ontario.
Walker, Kathleen. 1976, December 8. “Canadian Conservation Institute: An Interesting Exhibit Details Various Phases of Service and Operation.” The Ottawa Citizen. p. 99.
Case Study: Dawson City Museum Timeline, 1960s
Last updated: January 24, 2022
As part of the Dawson City Museum Project, I am creating timelines of the Museum’s development in relation to government policy and community action (1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s).
Museum Operations
1960:
The Museum building (the old fire hall) was destroyed by fire.
Old Dawson City Museum on Fire, June 5, 1960 (Artist: Roy McLeod; Dawson City Museum Archive 1993.3.11) The Museum began searching for a new space, asking to occupy the Old Territorial Administration Building as early as December 1960 (Haldenby 1960).
1961:
Building
The Dawson City Museum and Historical Society struggled to find a new building to house the museum.
Collections
Members of the Dawson City Museum and others made public appeals for objects to rebuild the Museum’s collections. These appeals asked specifically for objects from the Klondike Gold Rush (e.g., the Tear Sheet vol. 18 no. 5):
Found in: 1.1.4: Correspondence w secretary treasurer March 1958 to October 1960. Box 1. DCM. A Klondike Mines Locomotive was donated to the Museum. It weighed 30 tonnes and was transported across the River. Click here to listen to an interview about that experience.
Klondike Mines Railway Engine No. 1, 1970 (Artists: Ed and Star Jones; Dawson City Museum Archives 1998.22.172) 1962:
Building
The Museum opened in the Old Territorial Administration Building in time for the 1962 Gold Rush Festival.
Old Territorial Administration Building, May 1976 (Artist: Pam Elton; Dawson City Museum Archives 2006.4.21) Collections
An individual from the National Museum of Canada (Gaston Tessler) spent a week cataloguing the collection. He cleaned, organized and homogenized the space (Warner 1962, 1963).
Visitors engaged with the objects, providing more information or services. For example, someone offered to repair the harmonium. Another individual opened a “metal affair” to fit pieces together and demonstrate that it was a peanut-vending machine (Warner 1962, 1963).
Exhibitions
The Museum hosted traveling exhibitions (DCM Board Meeting Minutes, May 23, 1962; Warner 1963):
- Replicas of the Crown Jewels.
- Royal North West Mounted Police and the chase of the Mad Trapper of Rat River.
- Hudson’s Bay Pictures.
There were also displays of the museum artifacts, such as a broken harmonium, harness-maker’s vise, an old map of the Yukon.
Whitehorse Star, Thursday, June 14, 1962, p. 32. Other content included:
- a collection of prints from the national archives
- a display of old keys and machinery from the Canadian National Telegraph.
Fundraising (earned revenues)
The Museum sold what would now be called Inuit prints (DCM 1962).
Staffing
Victoria Faulkner (who recently retired from the Department of Northern Affairs) acted as Curator for the summer.
1963:
Whitehorse Daily Star, Monday, February 25th 1963, p. 12 Collection
The Museum received the original staking post from the Carmack’s claim.
Exhibitions
The Museum had displays of cabin interiors (Dawson City Museum Board Meeting Minutes, February 13, 1963).
1964:
Building
The Museum installed a furnace and purchased a blacksmith shop (Warner 1964).
Collections
The Dawson City Museum received funding from a private foundation to clean and paint three engines.
Whitehorse Daily Star, Monday, May 25, 1964, p. 21 “Old-timers” (a term used to discuss miners) estates were given to the Museum (Warner 1964).
There was a deep freeze that resulted in a lot of birds dying. Residents with freezers kept the birds and then a taxidermist in Whitehorse mounted them for the Museum (Warner 1964).
Warner (1964) described other acquisitions, such as old movie film and maps. Importantly, Indigenous baskets and other works were loaned to the Museum.
Exhibitions
The Museum acquired the contents of Harry Leamon’s cabin on Bonanza Creek and exhibited the content to represent a miner’s cabin.
Harry Leamon’s Claim, c1958 (Canadian Photo Archive; Dawson City Museum Archives 2004.13.35) Research
We begin to see Museum records on research request.
1966:
Exhibitions (Board Meeting Minutes, March 4, 1966)
The Museum has 970 objects on display (This is an assumption. The Minutes actually say they have 970 “exhibitions”).
1967:
Exhibitions
The Museum had 1,000 objects on display (This is an assumption. The Minutes actually say they have 1,000 “exhibitions”- Board Meeting Minutes, January 26, 1967).
1968:
Building
A failed fire inspection report threatened the Museum’s existence (see various letters in 1.1.38: Correspondence 1968. Box 1. Dawson City Museum).
Government Policy
First Nation (Tr’ondëk Hwëchin)
In 1960, the federal government granted First Nations people the right to vote in federal elections without losing treaty status. The Yukon Council of First Nations comments on the significance of this change:
A new generation emerged, barely intact from the brutality of the mission schools, and began a movement to fight oppression, provide vision and hope, and to gain some rights for the generations to come.
Source
Federal
1960:
National Historic Sites
A person from the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resource’s National Historic Sites Branch arrives in Dawson to conduct a study of older buildings (Stuart 1990).
Last Trip of the Keno, August, 1960 (Artist: Roy McLeod; Dawson City Museum Archive 1993.3.21) The Keno, which was donated to the Canadian Government in 1959, made its last voyage on the Yukon River to Dawson City.
SS Keno, August 1963 (Artist: Harold Dines; Dawson City Museum Archive 2013.1.17) Northern Administration
The Northern Affairs and National Resources’ Northern Administration Branch provided the Dawson City Museum with a 500$ grant for active societies (Collins 1960).
1961:
National Historic Sites
The National Historic Sites Branch acquires the Palace Grand Theatre (Stuart 1990), which the Klondike Visitors Association had purchased then turned over (plaque below).
Interpretive Panel, Palace Grand, 1963 (Artists: Ed and Star Jones; Dawson City Museum Archive 1998.22.190) 1962:
National Historic Sites Branch
The National Historic Sites Branch rebuilt and reopened the Palace Grand Theatre in time for the Gold Rush Festival.
Foxy, Palace Grand Theatre, August 18, 1962 (Canadian Photo Archive; Dawson City Museum Archives 1984.241.2) The Branch commissioned historical research on the Gold Rush and Dawson buildings, which became important later when the federal government began to acquire additional sites and offer interpretation in Dawson.
National Museums
A zoologist and two student assistants from the National Museum of Canada were in Dawson City for the summer (Lotz 1964).
A cataloguer from the National Museum of Canada spent a week at the museum cataloguing (Warner 1963). The cataloguer was likely one of the Zoologist’s student assistants. Warner (1962) notes Phil Youngman from the National Museum in Ottawa (He was a mammalogist, meaning he is likely the zoologist Lotz described) asked if his cataloguer could assist the museum.
1963:
Explicit Cultural Policy
Secretary of State becomes responsible for culture.
Mid 60s:
National Historic Sites
National Historic Sites had built the theatre and repaired the Keno, but did not participate in the Gold Rush Festival or operate the sites. They leased the sites to the Klondike Visitors Association for tourism related activity while the Mining Recorder acted as the Historic Sites agent in the area. He had limited authority and recommended a full time employee for the historic sites (Stuart 1990).
1965:
Explicit Cultural Policy
The House of Commons established a Standing Committee on Culture.
The Secretary of State recommended a national cultural policy.
1966: Federal officials traveled to Dawson and Recommend the establishment of positions in Yukon (Stuart 1990).
1967:
Explicit Cultural Policy
It was the Canadian Centennial year. The Federal Government invested in the celebration of the centennial.
National Historic Sites
The National Historic Sites Branch announced they would determine how their structures would be used.
The Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada held its annual meeting in Dawson, consulting community organizations. The Board recommended acquiring material relating to the Gold Rush, acquiring and preserving more building, the commemoration of gold mining, and the commemoration of Yukon transportation.
The federal government began acquiring sites, which would become part of the Klondike National Historic Sites (Stuart 1990).
For Dawson, the price of survival was the loss of autonomy. Paid for and developed from the outside by the Canadian taxpayer, Dawson depended upon external decisions for its future development.
Stuart 1990, 128National Museums
The National Museums of Museum of Canada Act passed, creating the National Museums Corporation to run the national museums.
1968:
National Historic Sites
The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development tabled the first policy statement on national historic sites at the recommendation of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada (Parks Canada 1976).
Other
The Government amended to Criminal Code to allow the federal and provincial governments to run lotteries, which influences future territorial funding programs that museums can access.
1969:
Other
The Official Languages Act passed, which influenced future museum funding from the federal government with bilingualism requirements for museums.
Territorial
1961: The Yukon Territorial Council discussed a territorial museum grant program (source).
1962: The Travel and Publicity Branch was established as a two person branch (Graham 1972).
1968: The Yukon Territorial Council discussed the procedures around existing grants. At this time, grants are being made to organizations, like Museum Societies, as special contributory grants without a policy (source).
Yukon Historic Sites and Monuments Board created with the Historic Sites and Monuments Ordinance.
Local
1967: The City renamed the Diamond Tooth Gerties Gambling Hall / Arctic Brotherhood Hall the Centennial Hall in honor of the Canadian centennial (source).
Community Action
1960: The Dawson City Festival Foundation was established.
1962: The Dawson City Festival Foundation organized the Gold Rush Festival with government assistance and the active participation of community organizations. The Klondike Visitors Association was particularly important.
The festival drew attention to the need for better infrastructure to attract tourists, such as improved accommodations (Lotz 1964).
Portable Motel Units Used During Gold Rush Festival, 1962 (Artists: Ed and Star Jones; Dawson City Museum Archive 1998.22. 166) 1963: The Klondike Visitor’s Association’s Gaslight Follies begin performing at the Palace Grand (source).
Program from the 1969 season (from the Jewish Museum Archives) 1966: The Yukon Consolidated Gold Corporation closed.
Questions
Do you know of any important milestones that are missing?
Would any of the entries benefit from more information or links to additional resources?
Resources
Where possible, sources are hyperlinked in text or included as pictures. Additional sources include:
Collins, F.H. 1960, November 24. Letter to the Dawson City Museum and Historical Society Secretary-Treasurer. 1.1.4: Correspondence. Box 1. Dawson City Museum Archives.
DCM. 1962, September 4. Museum Register. 1.1.10 correspondence 1962. Box 1. Dawson City Museum.
Graham, R. D. Tourism and Information Branch. Yukon. 1972. Yukon Tourism 1972 Annual Report: Review of the Yukon Travel Industry 1962-1972. Whitehorse.
Haldenby, Allan. 1960, December 7. Letter to the Superintendent public works. 1.1.4: Correspondence w secretary treasurer March 1958 to October 1960. Box 1. DCM Archives.
Warner, Iris. 1964, November 19. “Preserved in Museum at Dawson. Whitehorse Daily Star. p.9.
Warner, Iris. 1963. “A Museum for Dawson City.” North, 10(4): 13-16.
Warner, Iris. 1962. “Museum – Tribute to Dawson City. Lesson to All Communities.” Journal name is not clear.
Case Study: Dawson City Museum Timeline, 1950s and earlier
Last updated: January 24, 2022
As part of the Dawson City Museum Project, I am creating timelines of the Museum’s development in relation to government policy and community action (1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s).
Museum Operations
Dawson City Museum Exhibit, 1959 (Artist: Charles W. Schneider; Dawson City Museum Archives 1991.40.4) 
Dawson City Museum Exhibit, 1959 (Artist: Charles W. Schneider; Dawson City Museum Archives 1991.40.7)
1954: The Klondike Visitors Association opens the museum on June 28 in the old firehall (Doiron 2001).
Dawson City Museum, June 7, 1959 (Artist: Roy McLeod; Dawson City Museum Archive 1993.3.7) 1957:
Building
The Dawson City Museum and Historical Society formed to cash a cheque for $500 from the federal government (DCM Board Minutes, October 1959).
- The check is used to repair the old fire hall, housing the museum (DCM Board Minutes, February 25, 1961).
1959:
Governance
The Dawson City Museum and Historical Society incorporated, creating bylaws and a constitution (DCM Board Minutes, October 1959 and November 1959).
Whitehorse Star, Thursday, December 17, 1959, p. 6.
Government Policy
First Nation (Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in)
In the late 1800s, an increased number of people associated with the Klondike Gold Rush began settling the Tr’ochëk, displacing the Hän speaking Indigenous peoples. Chief Isaac moved his people to Moosehide.
Importantly, Chief Isaac also sent the gänhäk (dancing stick) to relatives in Tanacross village in Alaska. These relatives kept sacred songs and dances safe during a period of uncertainty for Hän speaking peoples from the Tr’ochëk (Council of Yukon First Nations; Stories North; Tr’ondëk Heritage).
1950s: The population at Moosehide had declined and the Hän people return to the area now incorporated as Dawson City (Council of Yukon First Nations).
Federal
1953: Historic Sites and Monuments Act
1957: Provided a $1,000 grant to Yukon museums, which is split between the Dawson City Museum and MacBride Museum.
1958: Prime Minister Diefenbaker was re-elected after a campaign that launched a northern vision (Norquay 2014).
1959: Prime Minister Diefenbaker suggested Dawson City should be developed as a tourist attraction (Taylor 1990).
The Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada recognized Dawson City (Stuart 1990).
Due to the HSMBC recognition, Parks Canada eventually began operating the Klondike National Historic Sites in Dawson City (link) A meeting between the Stratford Festival and Department of Norther Affairs and National resources led to a proposal for a Dawson City Festival (Stuart 1990).
Territorial
Importantly, the museum is now housed in a historic building – the Old Territorial Administration building.
Designed by Thomas Fuller in 1899 and built in 1901, the site is significant because of its association with the 1896 Gold Rush and subsequent settlement in the territory. It was the site of federal and territorial action until 1953.
1953: The territorial government was transferred to Whitehorse.
1959: The Yukon Territorial government offered a $300 operating and maintenance grant to registered societies (DCM 1988).
Local
1950: Dawson City incorporated (Lotz 1964)
1951: The City obtained Diamond Tooth Gerties Gambling Hall (then the Arctic Brotherhood Hall) and began operating it as a community hall (source).
Community Action
The 1896 Gold Rush is of particular importance to the development of both Dawson City and its museum. For more information about the Klondike Gold Rush, check out this Canadian Encyclopedia article.
When Dawson City ceased to be the capital of the Yukon (due in large part to the Alaskan Highway), attention to the tourism industry increased. Members of the community felt they had to draw tourists to survive (Stuart 1990).
1952: The Klondike Tourist Bureau (later, the Klondike Visitors Association) formed (English 1997).
Last trip of the Keno, August, 1960 (Artist: Roy McLeod; Dawson City Museum Archives 1993.3.21) 1958: The Klondike Tourist Bureau received a grant from the Yukon Visitors Association to fix up local attractions (Stuart 1990).
1959: The Klondike Tourist Bureau incorporated (Stuart 1990).
The Museum’s incorporation led to a surge in artifact donations from community members (DCM 1988).
Questions
Do you know of any important milestones that are missing?
Would any of the entries benefit from more information or links to additional resources?
References
Where possible, I have linked to sources. The following are references that are not currently available online:
Dawson City Museum & Historical Society. 1988. “1988 DCM History.” Box 14. Dawson City Museum Corporate Documents. Dawson City Museum Archives, Dawson City.
Taylor, C.J. 1990. Negotiating the past: The making of Canada’s National Historic Parks and Sites. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Case Study: Property Tax as Cultural Policy?
Municipal museums and related cultural institutions often have greater capacity than non-municipal museums because of the non financial supports municipal structures provide. Examples might include IT services, human resources, and lawn maintenance. Most importantly, municipal institutions are often housed in municipal buildings. As a result, they do not have to pay for utilities, maintenance and property tax.
Property tax can be a huge expense for museums and other cultural organizations (particularly non profit ones). For example, an article in the Canadian Museums Association’s Museogramme June/July 1991 issue discusses cut backs on staff, programs and hours at the Art Gallery of Hamilton. At the time, they were paying $300,000 in property taxes, leaving little for maintenance or preservation.
Within this case study post, I examine the MacBride Museum’s relationship with the City of Whitehorse to argue property tax abatement is a form of cultural policy, which has a major influence on the community museum sector. Petitioning municipalities for property tax exemptions is a significant form of cultural policy advocacy.
Whitehorse and the MacBride Museum
As part of the Dawson City Museum Project, I have been reading through the Yukon Historical and Museums Association’s (YHMA) newsletters. I talk about how useful museum association newsletters are to cultural policy research in another post (here).
As the YHMA’s Fall 2013 Newsletter, a few CBC articles (here, here, and here), and the MacBride Museum’s website describe:
1950s: The MacBride Museum opens. It did not (and has never) paid property taxes.
Mid 1990s: The City of Whitehorse provides non profits (including museums) with tax exemptions (100%).
2013: The City proposes a modification to the exemptions, planning to cover only 88% of the property tax payment.
The YHMA began sharing concerns, opposing the proposal through the radio, television, and papers.
The City’s proposal was voted down.
2014: The City reintroduces the proposal and it passes.
2015: The City passes an amendment that if the museum holds the title for their land, it would not be taxed. This exemption only applies to the MacBride Museum (and not the Transportation or Old Log Church museums).
2016: The MacBride Museum begins a planned expansion and confirms the exemption would continue to apply to their larger space.
2018: The City sends the MacBride Museum a bill for property tax after the assessed value of the museum’s property increased. The Museum’s annual property taxes had increased from about 30,000 to 71,000.
The City of Whitehorse argues the MacBride Museum is now ineligible for tax abatement because it has a cap of $50,000 on annual grants to a single organization. The MacBride Museum argues the 2015 amendment is not contingent on the size of the tax.
As of July 2021, property taxes and whether the MacBride is exempt seems to still be a point of contention. The MacBribe and YHMA have posted related content, showing advocacy in action.
- The YHMA has:
- The MacBride Museum has (most of these points are visible on their website – here):
- Asked for signatures on a petition and letters of support from other organizations
- Made a submission to City Council
- Correspondeded with the City
- Articulated an argument as to why they should not pay taxes
- Answered questions people may have about the issue simply and clearly. There are a number of questions and answers, but here is the first page:
Other Examples
As seen in the Yukon example, provincial governments often say non profits museums and other cultural organizations (or those registered as charities) can be exempt from property taxes. They allow municipalities to impose additional requirements, indicating the exemption is simply a possibility. Here are a couple of examples:
Alberta
A guide on property tax explains the exemption for museums and other cultural organizations. Notably, municipalities may impose additional requirements:
British Columbia
Provincial guidelines note museums owned by a charitable organization may be eligible for property tax exemption:
Saskatchewan
Under The Cities Act museums are not exempt from property taxes. However, they can be. In Saskatoon, for example, museums can apply for relief through the Culture Grant Program. They are not always successful! Click here for an example where the museum was not immediately successful but the City staff were committed to helping the organization meet requirements in the future.
Municipalities
As you can see, municipalities generally decide whether museums are exempt from property taxes in what is now known as Canada. As such, there is a lot of variance across the country. Part of the YHMA’s argument for the MacBride Museum is that most municipalities exempt museums. Here is a screenshot of their position with information on two municipalities:
Questions
To summarize, municipal tax exemptions are a significant form of cultural policy, requiring advocacy and attention, within what is now known as Canada. They demonstrate the important of advocacy at the municipal level (in addition to provincial / territorial, federal, and possibly First Nation).
Do you agree? Can you think of other significant examples?
Research: Newsletters
Newsletters are one of my favorite things to read when researching community museums and museum policy in what is now known as Canada.
They are so much fun!
Pre-internet newsletters are particularly helpful. Nowadays, a lot of organizations create email notifications with lots of links and short descriptions. As a researcher, I am not a fan. There is something more interesting about a physical newsletter or a PDF document with grainy photos and long descriptions.
This post is going to explore:
Why are newsletter so useful in community museum policy research?
No (or few) Links! And so Much Information!
The newsletters are such rich sources of information.
Email communications often link to a website for details. Conversely, the newsletters are (or were) more self contained and describe things.
For example, they describe speeches and personal communications not documented elsewhere. Or, if they are documented in an archive, the documentation can be difficult to find. The Canadian Museums Association’s (CMA) Gazette from the early 1970s provides information about the development of the national museum policy, demonstrating how the policy changed from the Honorable Gerald Pelletier’s initial ideas in 1970/71 to 1973. Here is an excerpt from a speech he gave at a conference in 1971 and the CMA’s response:
Before reading the Gazette, I did not know how much the museum policy had changed with the input of the CMA and other museum people.
Demonstrating and Simplifying Complexity
Community museums are not the designated responsibility of any one level of government in what is now known as Canada. They receive support from and are regulated by all levels. Further, the support and regulation is not limited to a singular department responsible for museums. For example, a museum may be eligible for support from economic or community development programs.
In addition to government, non profit associations provide support to community museums. And, once again, the support is not limited to associations specifically for museums. Community museums may also benefit from the work of associations connected to one of their programs or goals (e.g., a tourism association).
In relation to this complexity, newsletters do two things:
- They highlight the breadth of support available, demonstrating complexity.
The image below is from the Ontario Museum Association’s (OMA) newsletter – Currently – in 1983. The OMA provided information on a new organization for tourist attractions and a Ministry of Tourism and Recreation initiative related to tourism data. Articles like these demonstrate tourism related support is significant to community museums in Ontario.
2. Newsletters help define the scope of research, simplifying complexity.
In addition to demonstrating the complexity of support for museums, the example above also provides parameters for research. It shows that I should consider tourism related support AND also identifies the specific tourism related support of relevance, meaning I don’t have to research everything that the Ministry of Tourism and Recreation did that may be relevant. Presumably, the most relevant actions are already identified for me in newsletters.
The Human Component
I saved this one for last because it is my favorite part.
Newsletters demonstrate community. Through the newsletters people are (or were) able to learn about what other people are (or were) doing.
My favorite instances are “Current People News” from the OMA’s Currently, “Of People and Museums” from the CMA’s Museogramme, and any section of the OHS’s Museums Committees newsletters. Here are examples:
Interestingly, the Yukon Historical and Museum Association did not have a similar section / component in their early newsletters. These newsletters do not evoke the same sense of community that I have studied elsewhere. I am interested to see how or whether the association comes up during interviews for the Dawson City Museum Project.
Questions
How about you? Do you like reading these newsletters as a practitioner or researcher? What role do they serve? Do you have a favorite example that I should consider?
Podcasts: BC Museum Portraits Project
As someone who loves studying community museums, I am often frustrated that they do not have a lot of information available about their own histories.
So I was really excited to see the BC Museum Portraits Project. The podcast mini series is a collaboration between the BC Museums Association and Spencer Stuart, which aims to provide an institutional memory of the province’s museums. The podcasts are available here.
Course Application
I am excited to use the podcasts in a module on the historical development of museums in what is now known as Canada for our museum management course.
The objective is to better understand the development of museums in order to consider the causes of contemporary issues or opportunities.
Here is my current plan:
- Students will each have to listen to the episode of their choice as a required reading
- At the beginning of the “activity” class, they will be given some time to review their notes and prepare a mini presentation
- The presentation should introduce the museum and state 3 – 5 interesting things they learnt about the institution from the podcast episode they chose (and additional googling maybe?).
- I will give the following questions as prompts: Where do/did its collections come from? When/why was it founded? Did they discuss or explain any recent changes in their practices?
- Students will be divided into small groups. For most of the remaining time (classes are 1.5 hours), they will:
- Take turns presenting the information to their small groups.
- Work together to identify common themes and significant differences in the museums’ development.
- To end the class, we will come back together and each group will be asked about the similarities / differences.
I am excited to see what common themes the students identify!
Questions
Thoughts? Do you have any suggestion on how I could modify the plan so it is more useful to students?
Have you listened to the podcast? Do you have a favorite?
Case Study: The Importance of a Marvelous Lunch
When thinking about advocacy, I generally think of major campaigns.
For example, in 2011, about two hundred people showed up at Montgomery’s Inn (Toronto) to oppose rumored cuts to the City’s museums, which would have closed the historic site. There was also a petition and social media campaign. These advocacy efforts worked. Yay. If you would like to learn more, click here for an article about the efforts.
These kinds of campaigns are incredibly important because, as seen with the Toronto example, they can work! However, effective advocacy is not limited to a one day event or short term social media push. These efforts are most effective when paired with ongoing relationship building.
I have heard about the importance of relationship building at the local, provincial, and federal levels from museum professionals in Ontario and New Brunswick when researching community museum policy.
In my research for the Dawson City Museum Project, I am seeing the same thing. Ongoing relationship building with politicians is important. Fostering positive relationships can lead to more visibility and attention to museums within the legislature.
For example, after returning from a visit to Teslin in 2001, an MLA (Member of Legislative Assembly) asked the Minister of Tourism about the Museum Advisor’s recommendations to the George Johnston Museum and was able to get a commitment to fix an issue the Museum was having with their signage (Source). In this example, the Museum’s relationship building with their MLA led to concrete and immediate results.
The MacBride Museum provides a more entertaining example.
The MacBride Museum and Some Delicious Sandwiches
The MacBride Museum is located in Whitehorse – the capital of Yukon and where the Legislative Assembly sits. While there are other community museums in the area (e.g., Old Log Church Museum), the MacBride is larger, older, and has historically had better organization capacity.
The MacBride Museum is mentioned in the Legislature minutes more than any other Yukon community museum. A search for “MacBride Museum” in Hansard yields 125 results and a search for “McBride Museum” yields another five, meaning MLAs mention the museum in at least 130 sittings (I say at least because the search function can be unreliable). In comparison, “Old Log Church Museum” yields 5 results and “Dawson City Museum” yields 44 (“Dawson Museum” yields another 22 results but there is some overlap). While the Old Log Church Museum was established more recently and is much smaller, the Dawson City Museum and MacBride were both originally established in the 50s and, until recently, received the same amount in operational funding from the territorial government.
Why do the MLAs mention the MacBride Museum so much more than other community museums?
The Simple Explanation
The simplest explanation is that the MacBride Museum is in Whitehorse and has a longer history than other Whitehorse community museums. As a result, it may be the only museum some MLAs know to mention.
The Way to an MLAs Heart = Sandwiches
There is also a more entertaining explanation.
The MacBride Museum has held events for MLAs, which get mentioned in the minutes and keep the museum’s complaints fresh in their minds. One day, an opposition member decided it was important to push for more funding to the MacBride Museum (specifically and without consideration of other community museums) after the MacBride had fed the MLAs a “marvelous lunch” and told them about their troubles between sandwich bites.
The opposition member stated:
I would like to move on to a few heritage questions. The Minister will remember the marvelous lunch that we had at the MacBride Museum around Christmastime. Between bites of our sandwiches at the legislative lunch, we learned that the MacBride Museum was interested in seeking more funding from the department.
Source
The Minister responded that if they gave the MacBride museum increased funding, all the community museums would require more money because there was a formula.
The concern is that if you increase the funding of the MacBride Museum, you have to increase the funding of the other museums, because they are funded in a set ratio.
Source
The opposition member was not convinced and continued to refer back to the information the MacBride provided at lunch, concluding:
I am trying to get a better appreciation of what it was about the MacBride Museum’s argument that the Ministers felt did not provide sufficient justification for additional funds.
Source
The lunch did not lead to an immediate funding increase. However, it is indicative of the MacBride’s relationship building with MLAs, which does not include the other community museums. The MacBride is good at being remembered.
Why is this significant?
Historically, the MacBride Museum and Dawson City Museum (DCM) received the same operational grant from Yukon.
1950s: As early as 1957, the federal government provided $1,000 to the territory for museums, which the MacBride and DCM split equally.
1980s: While the DCM and MacBride eventually started receiving the same operating grant again, the MacBride received less operational funds than both the DCM and Old Log Church museum when the territorial program for museums began in the 80s.
Table from the 1986 Lord Report Please note: This section was added after the post was originally published to incorporate information from the Lord report.
2014: Both museums received $100,000 from the territory’s Museum Contribution Program (MCP).
Then, the Cole Report (2014) recommended increased funding through the MCP. One option involved an additional fee for service agreement with both the MacBride and DCM.
2015 and Beyond: In 2015, Yukon began a 30% increase to the museum grants.
As a result, the DCM now receives S130,000 from the MCP. The MacBride received a much larger increase. Yukon’s 2019-2020 public statements indicate they received $232,000.
Why did the MacBride begin receiving a much a larger grant?
I don’t know for sure. There does not seem to be any public explanation.
If you know the justification that Yukon Government gave, I would love to hear it. Please comment or message me!
However, I have an idea. I think it’s because the MacBride occasionally feeds MLAs yummy sandwiches. Or, more broadly, the MacBride seems to have fostered relationships whereby they are given more visibility in the legislature. Perhaps that visibility extends to the bureaucracy as well?
Questions
What do you think? Does the explanation make sense to you or is there another one that is a better fit?
Shared Bibliography on Cultural Policy
When writing about cultural policy in what is now known as Canada, finding references about the Canadian context can be difficult.
Cultural policy is not a distinct field because “culture” is such a broad concept and, as such, the sector encompasses a lot of subsectors with their own policy concerns. Cultural policy is studied within disciplines focused on specific subsectors (e.g., museology), communications, public administration, history, and more. If I tried listing every discipline that intersects with cultural policy, I would inevitably miss some.
These different disciplines write about cultural policy differently. For example, when researching heritage commemoration policy as a kind of cultural policy, I found historians’ works document government commemorative actions without ever using the keywords “cultural policy,” “heritage policy,” or even just “policy.” After discovering the correct keywords, I found so many more examples of relevance.
In an attempt to share labour, I created a Mendeley bibliography years ago with all of my sources on Canadian cultural policy and shared it with everyone I knew studying the subject. They said thank you, but no one ever seemed to use it or contribute to the resource.
I still think it’s a good idea.
So, I have now made it a teaching resource and am working to expand the bibliography so that it reflects more than my interests. It is available to view here.
The subject librarian at MacEwan is helping me to expand the resource now and I would love to see more sources added. If you’d like to contribute, ask to join! I would love to have help and to make this something that is useful for research broadly.
Museoception 