Talk:Fort Vancouver

message: Someone seemed to have vandalised this page - I restored it to its former glory.  There are some strange people out there! Andy
----
I too live here and it has always had the claim to being the largest fireworks display west of the Mississippi ... I'm the one who made the orginal notation.  I've been to many other cities as well and I stand by the statement.  It is what it claims to be. Amandalee-from Vancouver, Washington State
P.S. Zoe ... it is in Vancouver, Washington State, U.S.A
* Hi Amandalee, thanks for your reply here. I went ahead and added "said to be the largest west of the Mississippi". I can dig up at least three cases where Lake Tahoe claims their 4th of July fireworks is the "largest fireworks display west of the Mississippi", Idaho Falls claims their 4th of July fireworks is the "largest west of the Mississippi", and The Columbian calls Vancouver's claim "shaky". I know local folklore dies hard, and it's an oft-repeated statement, so it deserves to be in the article, but not authoritatively. --Nate 08:59 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)
:Although the claim is shaky, the basis for the claim was based on total cost of fireworks and timed length of show from first burst to last. - Rorybowman 05:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :But it was rumored that the border may be set at the Columbia River.
It was assumed by the British (HBC) that the logical boundary would be the Columbia.  But in the US, it was "assumed" that the Columbia was entirely American and the boundary would be at 54-40 (based on inflated interpretations of the Russo-Spanish treaty the Americans had inherited rights from the Russians on).  There were no "rumours" as there was no one in the territory to make/spread rumours.Skookum1 16:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This prompted the establishment of Fort George (now Astoria, Oregon), an American fort on the south bank near the mouth of the Columbia.
Uh, no.  Astoria's existence predates Fort Vancouver's, and now that I look at it the linktag for "Fort George" goes to Fort Astoria; there's a distinction but I don't know if the article for THAT Fort George exists yet so I'll leave it for now.  Skookum1 16:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Fort George was what the British renamed Astoria after taking control after the War of 1812. When I have more time I can provide more info on this. Pfly 06:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment about Fort Astoria discussed here

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 18:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 

message: I'm moving this sentence from the article to here. It has a citation needed tag already, and my understanding is that it is simply incorrect. The HBC had been planning to abandon Fort Vancouver, and all its operations south of the 49th parallel if the Oregon Treaty turned out that way. I don't think the US fort had much to do with it. But rather that just delete the sentence, I'm moving it here in case someone can provide a source:
Political pressure from the new fort prompted the Hudson's Bay Company to move its headquarters to Fort Victoria (now Victoria, British Columbia) over a period of time.
Thanks! Pfly (talk) 05:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, it seems that the moving of the headquarters/depot from Ft Vancouver to Victoria did not happen all at once. The book I have at hand, Mackie's "Trading Beyond the Mountains", says that in 1844 the HBC ship Vancouver was ordered to go from London directly to Victoria instead of Ft Vancouver and that the first supply vessel arrived in 1845. The first shipment of Columbia Department fur returns from Victoria was in 1846. And "within a short time, Fort Victoria's commercial purpose would be fulfilled..." Mackie goes on to say, "In 1843, the centre of gravity of the HBC's operations began to shift. The new depot... formed the centre of a new regional economy... With the founding of Fort Victoria, the move of British commercial capital to the north started in earnest." So, perhaps it is hard to say exactly when the headquarters actually "moved", but if nothing else the plan to move and founding of the new depot predates the 1846 Oregon Treaty. Pfly (talk) 17:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reason for HBC move to Victoria

message: I noticed this:
:The furs they had traded were shipped back on the supply ships with the furs from Fort Vancouver often being shipped to China where they were traded for Chinese goods before returning to England, with the furs from York Factory being sold in London in an annual fur sale. This continued until 1846, when the fort found itself on American soil.
Actually I'm not certain that 1846 was the year of the very last Express, although it was in this period when alternate routes were being sought by Anderson north of 49....When was the date of transfer of Fort Vancouver from HBC to the US mlitary?  BEcause under the Oregon Treaty the Company retained ownership of its assets south of the line, though continued operation of them proved impractical and they were soon shut down....just wondering if there wasn't an Express in '47, even '48....the Brigade that went from Fort Langley via Fort Hope and the Coldwater Trail to Kamloops wasn't, I think, until 1848, and even so it was only experimental (and was a flop); there's another route that was used, in the vicinity of today's BC Hwy 3....but something tells me in the back of my noggin the Express didn't end until Ft Vancouver was completely given up by the HBC, whever that exactly was.  At the time of the treaty's signing, SFAIK, it remained in HBC hands despite underlying title passing to the US.....Skookum1 (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Termination of "The Express"

message: The current Vancouver Barracks is worthy of its own page as it is currently a Washington Army National Guard Facility.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BGinOC (talk • contribs) 11:44, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate Vancouver Barracks onto new page 

message: Show 1824 drawing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.54.225 (talk) 13:10, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1824