Canada’s historic sites in poor shape

A new review of a previous study shows Canada’s historic sites are in bad shape.

Parks Canada is the federal agency which overseas 200 national parks, marine conservation areas, and historic sites.  This includes historic buildings, archeological sites, forts, canals and locks, along with campgrounds, roads, bridges and dams in the parks and sites.

In 2012, a Parks Canada study found that 47 percent of its assets were in poor or very poor condition.

However a recent independent review came up with a rather more worrisome picture. Opus International Consultants estimated that 53 percent of assets were in poor to very poor shape.

Of the approximately  2,000 historic sites of old forts, historic houses, heritage canal locks, and so on, Parks Canada’s original report listed 33 percent in poor or very poor shape. The review however, almost doubled that number to 61 percent

Parks Canada, severely criticized in 2009 for failing to maintain a reliable inventory, undertook a review in 2012 and estimated  there was almost $3 billion worth of deferred repairs.

Half of that money was set aside for so-called “high risk” assets like roads, bridges, and waterways. The Opus review found these were actually in better shape than Parks Canada estimated, but that irreplaceable cultural assets were the most neglected with almost two-thirds requiring maintenance and repair costing about $230 million.

Parks Canada has been hard hit by budget cuts, last year losing about 13 percent of its staff across the country.

In 2007, then Auditor-General Sheila Fraser slammed the lack of preservation of heritage sites.

In her report to Parliament at the time  she said, “These places recall the lives and history of the men and women who built this country”. The report added, “They help us to better understand the present and prepare for the future. When important parts of Canada’s built heritage are lost, future generations of Canadians are deprived of access to key moments of their shared history.”

She also noted the problems associated with gaps in protection and maintenance as a result of different departments having authority over the country’s many heritage sites, with Parks Canada controlling some, Public Works controlling others, and National Defence controlling still others, all having different priorities and budget concerns.