Talk:Stikine Region

message: Please note that there is no "Stikine Regional District". This entire area is unincorporated, that is, no municipal or regional districts exist in the "Stikine Region". --maclean25 06:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Atlin does have several hundred people, in th vicinity anyway; the StatsCan list gives only the population fo the unnamed IR in that area; which points up the problems with StatsCan figures - in other words, where does StatsCan account for Atlin's non-reserve population; and as per my comments below, IR populations are irrelevant to the RD-divisions, as IR residents don't vote in the Electoral Area.Skookum1 (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

text: The map is of Regional Districts and interestingly the designated RD doesn't include most of the Stikine basin/plateau, which is to the south of the red-marked area.  I found this page by a redirect from Stikine, which should actually be a disambiguation page (Stikine Plateau, Stikine River, STikine Ranges, Stikine Territory, and so on - I dropped by to add a tag to Stikine Territory q.v.).  I think maybe the use of "Region" in the title complicates the non-RD issue, which is why I titled Cariboo District and Chilcotin District that way, although in speech you'd be more likely to use Cariboo Country or Chilcotin Country (or most likely of all "the Chilcotin", "the Cariboo", "the Stikine" etc).  In historical usages, saying "Cariboo District" or "Lillooet District" tended to mean the land districts of those names; similar to the saying Cariboo Region implies the/a Cariboo Regional District.  I've always like the "Country" designation better, part by feel and part because it conveys things neither the LD or RD associations do; in the case of the Lillooet Country vs the Lillooet District (Land District) the boundaries are in fact very different.  With the Stikine though, and elsewhere, I think avoiding the use of "Region" and using "District" instead will get the idea better, and avoid confusion with RD articles.Skookum1 19:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

message: (pronounced )
If I knew how to write IPA, I'd at least add whatever "Stih-keen" comes off as, i.e. not with the schwa as indicated; yeah, it's pronounced that way, but I'd venture if you sampled around a lot of people, particularly First Nation but not limited to them would make a point of the "i", rather than lazify it into a schwa.  Yeah, I may do that sometime myself; but the proper way, and closer to the original Tahltan also, is more of an "ih" sound, whatever the IPA for that is.Skookum1 10:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Issue with IPA of pronunciation

message: Seems a bit odd that only an unnamed reserve with a population of 10 is listed for the area of Atlin; all the more curious when IR residents don't vote in RD elections, but it's one of hte problems with equating RDs-as-census-divisions with RDs-as-geographic-regions.  Vanished towns, like the several on Dease Lake (Centre City, e.g.) IMO shouldn't be in RD articles/cats anyway as they didn't exist by the time the RD system was come up with in 1967;  Jade City on the other hand grew up since then, though it was never a city and was simply a name attached to the jade mine in that area, which is FWIK the largest in the world, or was; in the same area was McDame Post, but I'm unclear if it was simply a trading post operated by Harry McDame and/or if it was an HBC post as was, I think, Good Hope Lake; Liard River was an HBC post, I think, and Lower Post.  Fort Durham was in the area described by the boundaries, but it didn't last all that long.  Also the "Dease Lake 1" type entry in the table may be what Census Canada calls "Dease Lake Indian Reserve No. 1" but I don't think it's an adequate naming system, especially when presented in tables like this - non-Canadians, and Canadians unfamiliar with StatsCan's abbreviated names - are not going to recogniae "Dease Lake 1" as being an IR...and once again, I'm uncertain that figures presented for it are relevant to the Electoral Area; they're relevant only as part of the census division.Skookum1 (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other communities/localities

message: yet another reason why I don't think RDs are useful as gegoraphic divisions for the province; they're impermanent. The Eletoral Area surrounding Dease Lake is now part of Kitimat-Stikine; I'm too bored/tired to re-word the whole article, but it needs doing to say that Dease lake used to be in this "Region" but made some basic fixes.  See , which please note also needs its article-title changed.Skookum1 (talk) 03:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Found maps of the RDKS and STikine Region showing the new boundary, an oblong block north of the boundary shown so far, which is now RDKS Electoral Area 'F'.  See Talk:List of regional districts of British Columbia.Skookum1 (talk) 03:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Dease Lake now part of Kitimat-Stikine

message: As Stikine is not incorporated, it is incorrect to consider the region to be 'quasi-municipal'.  There is no local government with jurisdiction for the entire region.  It was left over when the other regional districts were created and could have been incorporated if that had been considered necessary.  But the population is so sparse and scattered, that it never made sense for the province to incorporate this area separately.  Will rewrite this when I get a chance. Corlyon (talk) 16:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, "quasi-municipal" may not be quite right, but "unincorporated" also applies to non-municipal lands within regional districts; i.e. it's an inappropriate way to refer to Stikine Region vs teh actual regional districts.  "Unorganized" is maybe the only available term.  As in my other discussions elsewhere, the type of services provided by regional district-level local government are municipal in nature, hence the "quasi-municipal" term which, yeah, I coined, and which in the Stikine Region's case are managed directly by the provincial government.  BUT in terms of "local government", here as in the regional districts, that's a misleading term as it gives undue weight to the role of the regional districts (or in this, regional district-type powers used by the prov gov) in local governance; MUCH more important in most of the province and MUCH more powerful is the Ministry of Forests, and in the Stikine Region it's decidedly the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Resources, that's the most active and the most powerful arm of teh government, and in local life, other than the government services provided in Atlin by the local Government Agent's office.  So however you want to word it, it should be explicit that the Stikine Region as a term/"jursidictin" is only relevant to things like sewage/septic and building permits, and not much else.  It also should not be treated as a geographic article, or used to categorize things that have nothing to do with its role (which is marginal); there really isn't much reason, in fact, for the existence of :Category:Stikine Region, British Columbia (it doesn't even have an office, or staff, never mind any regional parks or o facilities)....and whatever you could find on teh new boudnary, excluding Dease Lake (see previous section), is needed for teh article's accuracy (and re-making the regional district wiki-basemap).Skookum1 (talk) 18:12, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The term 'local government' in B.C. is used as a catch all to describe municipalities and regional districts, i.e.. the Local Government Act.  While the Provincial ministries play a huge role in determining what goes on in relation to the territory of more sparsely populated regional districts, most of the citizens in the Province are affected daily by some form of local government or other, be it municipal or, outside municipal boundaries, regional districts.  It is common to call the areas outside municipal boundaries 'unincorporated', but (apart from Stikine) they haven't actually been 'unincorporated' since the 60s/early 70s.  They are within the regional district corporate boundaries.  They just typically have large areas that don't require and don't receive 'municipal' services.  Stikine is the one area that does not have a 'regional district' form of governance (except to the extent that the Atlin area has now been brought into Kitimat-Stikine R.D.) so it really shouldn't be described using the same language as incorporated regional districts that have functioning boards and statutory powers.  I'm not 100% sold on 'quasi-municipal' as a descriptor for regional districts, but it has the advantage of being understandable to most readers, so it serves a useful purpose, and my preference is to retain what is useful rather than quibble over small distinctions. I will be cautious about making any changes to this article, and will see if I can find anything that describes the change in the boundaries of the RD Kitimat-Stikine. I agree the regional districts are not useful to describe geographic regions; but they serve a modest geopolitical purpose. In the southern parts of the province the role of the regional districts (or their proxies in Metro Vancouver) is not modest:  they run the landfills, trunk sewers, water reservoirs & bulk water supplies; local water & sewer systems for small communities outside the municipal areas (that don't have improvement districts to supply water); local fire departments; local community parks; look after rural planning (a big task for RDN, Cowichan Valley, Comox Valley and the Okanagan), regional parks (big ticket item for CRD and Metro Vancouver) and the sleeping giant of regional planning. Then there's all the odds and ends services.  Central Coast RD runs a bus service for the medical centre.   One runs a marina.  Another has an airport service.  The CRD is responsible for many of the docks on the Gulf Islands, picked up when they were dropped by Ottawa in its "why should we do anything?" phase.  And all over the province, with downloading by senior levels of government, citizens in the rural areas have to rely increasingly on their regional governments to get anything done. Corlyon (talk) 05:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Not Incorporated; Not 'Quasi-Municipal'

message: How many first nation and metis are there?--Kaiyr (talk) 12:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: first nation and metis