THE HERITAGE LIGHTHOUSE PROTECTION ACT
On May 29, 2010, the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act (HLPA), passed by Parliament in May 2008, came into force and the mechanism for
obtaining heritage status for lighthouses was announced.
Details and a link to text of the act is at
(Parks Canada Website)
LIST OF SURPLUS LIGHTHOUSES MADE PUBLIC
On the same day that the act came into force, Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) made public a list of surplus lighthouses.
DISAPPOINTING ANNOUNCEMENT BY COAST GUARD
In accordance with section 8(1) of the "Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act" (HLPA), Canadian Coast Guard published on May 29th, 2010,
a list of surplus lighthouses (active and inactive) under their jurisdiction. Every lighthouse with exception of lighthouses still staffed has been
declared surplus. By this decision, DFO / Coast Guard is refusing to take any active role in the future implementation of the HLPA. Entire
responsibility for preserving Canada's lighthouses has been placed in the laps of communities.
A lighthouse will not be awarded heritage status unless those applying are willing to maintain it. For some smaller lighthouses this is possible.
For the large, very historic iconic towers, such as Sambro Lighthouse (oldest standing and operating lighthouse in the Americas), it is not.
By declaring all lighthouses surplus DFO has opened the way for a wholesale sell off of these important buildings, and the coastal lands and
islands that are now publicly owned, to developers and private individuals. Canadians stand to loose an irreplaceable part of their heritage and
access to large portions of the coast, both ocean and lake. Every province except Alberta is impacted by this move.
It was the hope that Coast Guard would retain ownership of some of the more "iconic" lighthouses across the Country and partner with community
groups and so that these historic structures could be open to and experienced by the public. The sheer size of some of these icons puts their
long-term care outside the ability of smaller not-for-profit groups and thus places their future in jeopardy. This is the exact opposite of what the HLPA was designed to do.
Coast Guard has taken the stand that DFO is not in the heritage business but is mandated only for a marine safety program and as such is not
funded to care for heritage buildings. This flies in the face of a Federal policy to recognize and protect designated properties owned by the Federal
government. The Federal Buildings and Review Office (FHBRO), administered by Parks Canada, has designated a total of 119 lighthouses across
Canada. According to FHBRO policy, designated buildings are to be kept in a reasonable state of repair by the custodial department (in this case, DFO).
This seems to include heritage as part of DFO's mandate. In addition, other Federal departments (Department of National Defense is an example) have
taken their heritage role seriously and seem to find funding to live up to their responsibilities in caring for heritage structures under their care. Why
cannot DFO do the same?
In conclusion, it is our hope that DFO will re-think their decision and take a hands-on approach as implementation of this important legislation begins.
HOW YOU CAN HELP
Write letters to the following:
Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
Hon. Gail Shea, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
Hon. Jim Prentice, Minister of the Environment
If you are a Canadian, cc your MP.
The list of MP's
Address for all is:
House of Commons, Parliament Buildings,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0A6
The lists of surplus lighthouses may be found at
PROBLEMS WITH THE LIST OF SURPLUS LIGHTHOUSES
Note that at present (June 10, 2009) the list is inaccurate. In the Maritime Provinces, at least, lighthouses are mixed up as far as their location in a particular province. Lights that are already skeleton towers are included, and some "lighthouses" are simply a light on a pole on a wharf. In the inactive list, lights that have already been passed over to community groups are included, and some "lighthouses" listed are in places where there is no building at. It may be surmised that DFO still owns the land at these sites, but the act is about buildings, not land.
We have been told that DFO will be issuing an updated list. When it is issued, notice will appear here.