Talk:Hudson Bay

message: Not to sound stupid but I am seriously curious, are there any recreational beaches on the Hudson Bay or is it just too cold, or too sparsely populated, or not enough wave action for sand beaches, or too darn many polar bears? Seriously though, are there any recreational beaches there? Thanks
:The shoreline is mostly composed of rock boulders and pebbles.  The flats have some beaches, but I bet there are too many bears to keep an eye on, and it should be a bit too cold for a non resident to swim in —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arviatlands (talk • contribs) 17:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Any Beaches?

message: Is Hudson Bay part of the ocean or is it a Canadian territorial body of water?
Jim McPherson
----
It is a part of the Dominion of Canada, and is totally under their jurisdiction.
:More specifically, all of the waters and islands in Hudson Bay are part of Nunavut, if I read the maps correctly. knoodelhed (talk) 06:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see :File:NorthAmerica-WaterDivides.png, which shows that parts of the United States are in the Hudson Bay watershed and drain into the bay. Mindmatrix 19:07, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Administration 

message: Also, maybe it'd help if someone coloured the map (blue for water). Kokiri
: Done. --Menchi 01:21, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map colour 

message: Someone anonymously reverted my change to make the article consistant and accurate regarding the "'s".  I have reverted back to my version and added a small explanation. CWood 00:21, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In the US an early decision was made by, th US Board on Geographic Names, that the name of no US geographic location should have an apostrophe.  Pikes Peak being the best known example.  But, since Hudson's Bay is not in the US, I don't think we should honor the US convention.  I think we should use "Hudson's Bay"  --  Geo Swan 11:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Oh?  Can you cite a source?  I am highly skeptical of your assertion.  --  Geo Swan 15:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Geographic Names Board of Canada has the Bay as "Hudson Bay". http://geonames2.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi-bin/v8/sima_name_v8?english . If this is how the Government of Canada officially refers to this body of water, Wikipedia should also use this naming convention.  As a side note, I have never seen a modern map labelling this body of water as Hudson's Bay. CWood 00:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I grew up on the shores of Hudson Bay, and it's so labelled on pretty much every map (Canadian, admittedly) I've seen. Some of the confusion might result from the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) of yore, which IIRC does use the possessive form. But the Bay itself (the landform, not the company) is "Hudson". - FlyingOrca 22:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the name of the Company used the 's and the official name of the Bay doesn't use it, that should lead to no confusion between the two. In stating that there may be confusion, our article is surely wrong. I guess it's a carryover from the far off days when this article was at Hudson's Bay, so I'll remove the statement. If I'm mistaken, and it does make sense currently, my deletion could be reverted of course but it would be best to add a source. Andrew Dalby 15:29, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a line within the article (since removed) that said, "Due to a change in naming conventions, Hudson's Bay is now called Hudson Bay." I included a citation needed tag for this claim. This claim seems particularly important, given that the article name is given without the apostrophe. Does anyone have a source that describes the change? Tkbrett (✉) 17:07, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hudson Bay vs. Hudson's Bay 

message: The Mediterranean sea article says Hudson's Bay would fit its definition of a Mediterranean sea, except it was so shallow it functions like a huge estuary.  So, how shallow is it?  --  Geo Swan 11:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Without looking, I found 260m mentioned, but haven't stumbled across an authoritative source.  (SEWilco 19:39, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the depth is getting shallower and shallower.  In fact, the isostatic rebound is happening faster than the melt water is rising, literally.  So, the older residents recognize the many islands that were not in earlier history, compared to now, which are growing in numbers and getting shallower. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arviatlands (talk • contribs) 17:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Depth?

message: Is Hudson Bay considered world's largest? I've heard it claimed...  Trekphiler 18:30, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Size matters

message: Is the Hudson Bay navigable for trade ships having large containers?
Yes it is - Churchill, Manitoba has a huge grain shipping terminal on the shore of Hudson Bay. CWood 02:58, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Navigability

message: Are there fish in the bay? Any commercial or rec fishing?
:Arctic char is mostly caught on these waters.  Also, cod, scalpin, shrimps, seals, but to a lesser extent.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arviatlands (talk • contribs) 17:57, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: fish?

message: This was added and should be answered. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Salinity

message: Hudson Bay is 1.23 million km², making it the second-largest bay in the world (after the Bay of Bengal). It is relatively shallow, with an average depth of about 100 meters (compared to 2,600 meters in the Bay of Bengal). It is approximately 1,370 km (850 mi) long and 1,050 km (650 mi) wide.[2] On the east it is connected with the Atlantic Ocean by Hudson Strait, and on the north with the rest of the Arctic Ocean by Foxe Basin (which is not considered part of the bay) and Fury and Hecla Strait. Geographic coordinates: 78° to 95° W, 51° to 70° N.
Hudson bay is the largest body of water all within one country 
LisaWange (talk) 15:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure why this was posted here, but the Sea of Okhotsk might count as a larger body of water within one country. Pfly (talk) 06:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Sea of Okhotsk doesn't qualify as a body of water entirely within the boundaries of one country. To the north, the east, and the west, the Sea of Okhotsk is shored by Russia, but, its most southern shores ar on the Island of Hokkaido, which is part of the Country of Japan. So, the Sea of Okhotsk is bordered shared by two counties. Brightfamouswoodcucumber (talk) 13:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description 

message: Has anyone ever considered trying to build a huge dam, levy, or sea wall across the narrow channels that connect the bay to the ocean?
If the bay already has a measurably lowered salt content than the rest of the ocean, it may be possible through damming for it to become the largest freshwater lake in the world after several decades of flushing out the salts and preventing the salts from re-entering the basin through tidal forces and diffusion.
This is certainly an interesting idea if global warming were to follow the suggested path of melting the permafrost and the United States and Mexico becoming more arid. Having the largest freshwater lake in the world would hold significant economic value for Canada if that region were to become more temperate.
DMahalko (talk) 16:38, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not so sure that spending all the time, effort, energy, manpower, and money to build such a massive dam would serve to provide all that much of an economic boon in the event of more southern countries drying up. it's at sea level now. It would cost a fortune to try to pipe the water anywhere that dams higher up couldn't reach a whole lot lest expensively. The water would have to be shipped elsewhere, but, at what point does it become less expensive to use solar energy to distill seawater and bottle the recondensed steam and transport it inland, than to use fossil fuels to ship impure water, which will still have to be purified before becoming drinkable. I'm not so sure your proposal would be the most economical way to go. Brightfamouswoodcucumber (talk) 13:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damming the bay to make a freshwater lake? 

message: "When the ice cleared in the spring Hudson wanted to explore the rest of the area, but the crew mutinied on June 22, 1611. They left Hudson and others adrift in a small boat. No one knows the fate of Hudson and the crewmembers stranded with him, but historians believe they died." I'm not a historian or anything, but I think they made it.--Toepoaster (talk) 21:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I was tempted to come here and comment on that, then remembered this wasn't Fark where snarkiness is expected. All of the evidence suggests that anyone alive in 1611 would have died since, whether the subject of a mutiny or not.  A good clarification would be that "historians see no evidence that they survived for long afterwards."Bollox Reader (talk) 08:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  lol 

message: With regards to the History section on the bay, Sebastian Cabot in 1509 sailed the bay, believing to have found his way into the Pacific. He was a patron of Henry VII.
81.135.138.110 (talk) 20:09, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 81.135.138.110, 13 February 2011 

message: The sentence describing the drainage basin might place a little bit of unnecessary relevance on the current political political geography when describing the physical geography.
"It drains a very large area, about 4,041,400 square kilometres (1,560,400 sq mi), that includes parts of Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Alberta, most of Manitoba, southeastern Nunavut, as well as parts of North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Montana."
It seems that the "as well as part of" makes an arbitrary distinction between these two groups of land areas with out explaining what makes them warrant separation. Perhaps one of these two suggestions would work better:
1. It drains a very large area, about 4,041,400 square kilometres (1,560,400 sq mi), that includes parts of Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Manitoba, Nunavut, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Montana.
or
2. It drains a very large area, about 4,041,400 square kilometres (1,560,400 sq mi) comprised of land located in the Canadian provinces of: Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Manitoba and Nunavut and the US states of: North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Montana.
Just my 2 cents.
96.248.6.7 (talk) 01:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Either of those would be an improvement. I have no strong preference which though. Bazonka (talk) 12:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awkward Sentence  

message: The International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) considers Hudson Bay to be part of the Arctic Ocean. The IHO is the inter-governmental organisation representing the hydrographic community. It enjoys observer status at the United Nations where it is the recognised competent authority on hydrographic surveying and nautical charting. When referring to hydrography and nautical charting in Conventions and similar Instruments, it is the IHO standards and specifications that are normally used. Palaeozoic99 (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The IHO source cited—and all other IHO "boundaries of the seas and oceans" definitions I have seen, do not say which ocean Hudson Bay (or any other sea/gulf/bay/etc) belongs to. They define the limits of oceans, seas, bays, and so on, but do not specify which is part of which. Perhaps I am wrong—I'd like to be wrong—can you provide a source that says what you claim? Pfly (talk) 23:05, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Part of the Arctic Ocean 

message: Can someone please tell me how Hudson Bay is connected to Alberta? Check first paragraph.
Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawsomethingwrong (talk • contribs) 02:43, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at this: . Bazonka (talk) 10:17, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alberta? 

message: There is no information on the actual amount of the difference. Cliffswallow-vaulting (talk) 01:45, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Gravity anomoly

message: This article and the "Inland sea" article seem to be in contradiction. This article asserts that Hudson Bay "is relatively shallow and is considered an epicontinental sea," providing a link to the "Inland sea" article. That article (which incidentally never uses the phrase "epicontinental sea") states that the Caspian sea is the largest inland sea, and thus apparently does not consider Hudson Bay to be an inland sea. Ishboyfay (talk) 05:03, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it an epicontinental sea? 

message: See proposal Talk:James Bay (singer) to move the Hudson Bay water body out of the way and move in the English pop singer. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: [[James Bay]] vs [[James Bay (singer)]]

message: Someone needs to translate  into English. Will (Talk - contribs) 08:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone translate [[Commons:File:Arctic Routes (RUS).svg]] into English? 

message: This article's first paragraph contains this sentence:
It drains a very large area, about , that includes parts of southeastern Nunavut, Saskatchewan, most of Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and indirectly through smaller passages of water to parts of North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Montana.
I have two questions:
: 
* What exactly does "indirectly" mean in this case?
* Is the Red River considered a "smaller passage of water"? I had thought of it as one of the major rivers of that region. It carries all or nearly all of the water that flows from the United States ultimately into the Hudson Bay, having as tributaries various rivers whose sources are in Minnesota or North Dakota. Also, some in South Dakota flow into Lake Traverse, the source of the Bois de Sioux River, whose confluence with the Otter Tail River is where the Red River begins. Michael Hardy (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indirectness and smaller passages 

message: — Assignment last updated by Quyen Le B (talk) 05:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Information Studies

message: — Assignment last updated by Wikiforschoolhomework (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Information Studies