Statistics Canada Reports II

[trueviking]

^ ten years later Winnipeg was number three.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by niwell

While I was already living in Ontario at that time I remember those stories from family/friends in Calgary. People would decide to go on a bender and basically say "either hire me back or I'll just go somewhere else". Wild times. When visiting in those years I remember service at retail/restaurants being particularly bad (except high-end places), which is probably not surprising.

Fast food places and some chain restaurants were closing down since they could not find employees. I remember KFC and Arby's closing at 7 pm in Calgary as "nobody wanted to work the night shift. McDonald's and Tim Hortons were smart enough to pay above minimum wage, as well as give $500 towards a workers tuition if conditions were met.

Places like Burger King paid minimum wage, and the service and sanitary conditions were horrible.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by Architype

These stats from 1901 are the most awesome ones for Canada, when St. John's was larger than Vancouver, and BC was the second smallest provincial population.

And when Saint John was St. John, and larger than St. John’s.

Some things are cyclical in this world, and I truly think Saint John will be larger than both Moncton and St. John’s again one day. . . I just hope I live long enough to see it.

Clearly though, we’ll need some far more effective solutions to get more people here, and keep them here, for that to be possible, but I truly think it is possible.


Imo, the city with the third largest port in the country should be a lot bigger than the 32nd largest metro area. But hopes and dreams don’t bring about sustained demographic growth… we need a better strategy and better solutions.

[someone123]

The explosive growth rates seen in a lot of Canadian cities around 2021-2024 echoes the early 1900's in some ways, although this spurt was a lot shorter.

The usual caveat applies that those 1901 numbers are for municipalities, not CMAs, which did not exist at that time.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by someone123

The explosive growth rates seen in a lot of Canadian cities around 2021-2024 echoes the early 1900's in some ways, although this spurt was a lot shorter.

The usual caveat applies that those 1901 numbers are for municipalities, not CMAs, which did not exist at that time.

in 1901 metros weren't much of a thing. You either lived in the city or in the country; suburbs didn't exist except as country homes for the rich, and agricultural areas. People didn't commute, there were no cars to speak of, and railways weren't suited to daily commuting in most areas. According to google, using today's boundaries, Toronto at that time would have been about 238,000, and I assume that would have been equivalent to a "metro" area in 1901. In Vancouver's case, New Westminster was a separate established city and would have been the largest part of a metro, having about 6,500 people, and the surrounding rural areas might have totaled 5,000.

[DavidK93]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Through the 80s, there was not much difference, population wise between the Calgary and Winnipeg CMA's. By 1991, Calgary had roughly 100,000 more people.

It was not until Winnipeg stagnated in population (and lost people between 1995-97), while Calgary was at the beginning of the oil boom, where it started to become noticeably larger than Winnipeg. I still remember by the time I hit 20, the talk of Calgary being the place to be for jobs, and better career options became louder and louder, until many people I knew were heading out that way by the early 2000s.

Calgary's had several oil booms and previous to the early 90's was a city of boom-bust cycles. Since the mid 90's the city has slowly been moving away from oil and gas, a slow move, but a steady one.
I lived in Calgary in the late 90's when oil was really in a bust cycle. Oil was something like $15.00 a barrel, but Westjet was starting up, and growing fast. Shaw Communications moved from Edmonton and CP moved from Montreal. Around that same time he Alberta government privatized some divisions, and a lot of those jobs moved to Calgary, I was involved in one of those projects. Even with oil in the tank Calgary was going gangbusters. Since that time, oil has had it's boom bust cycles, but the city seems to be less affected by them and grow even when oil is in a down cycle. I think it's why Calgary has been pedal to the metal for like 25 or 30 years straight.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

At 40, it is interesting that Metro Vancouver has now more than doubled in size since I was born (around 2.2 times now).

It's funny hearing Kelowna described as surprisingly small, since not too long ago it and Kamloops were neck and neck (both around 100 000, Kelowna slightly above and Kamloops slightly below) now Kelowna is twice the size (and Kamloops has also continued to grow slowly).

That's why it's so surprising! We're about the same age, and all my life I've heard of Kelowna as this crazy boom town. For a western-Canadian city it's decently urban. And now it's even got a pretty tall skyline going. In my mind it's a city of 450k. The reality surprises me.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by DavidK93

Calgary's had several oil booms and previous to the early 90's was a city of boom-bust cycles.

In my lifetime, there have been two:

The oil boom that began after the oil embargo by OPEC in 1974, which lasted roughly until the early 80s. And most recently,the oil boom from the early 2000s until 2014. From all a accounts, we will be waiting a long time before another oil boom occurs, if it ever happens again.

Since the mid 90's the city has slowly been moving away from oil and gas, a slow move, but a steady one.

This is just not true. Alberta lives and dies with the oil and gas industry. I believe it was Peter Lougheed tried unsuccessfully to diversify the economy, but in the end, it did not work.

Now that we have Danielle Smith and the UCP in charge, they are doubling down on the oil and gas industry, and are actually impeding efforts to diversify the economy, especially regarding green energy.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Andy6

I’m old enough to remember when Calgary was a slightly glorified Regina and not even close to Winnipeg.

1950s?

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by biguc

That's why it's so surprising! We're about the same age, and all my life I've heard of Kelowna as this crazy boom town. For a western-Canadian city it's decently urban. And now it's even got a pretty tall skyline going. In my mind it's a city of 450k. The reality surprises me.

My grandparents lived in Kelowna in the early-mid 1970s, and back then it maybe had 40K?

[trueviking]

I posted the CMA numbers from here on twitter and everyone from all the small cities and towns in southern ontario are mad.....Mississauga is really mad....even the mayor piped up with a "we are not Toronto!"

[MolsonExport]

Mississauga is fine and dandy. I've got family living there.

But would it even exist, or bear any resemblance to what it is today, without Toronto?

[trueviking]

most Canadians think it's just the Toronto airport.

[Harrison]

Originally Posted by DavidK93

Calgary's had several oil booms and previous to the early 90's was a city of boom-bust cycles. Since the mid 90's the city has slowly been moving away from oil and gas, a slow move, but a steady one.
I lived in Calgary in the late 90's when oil was really in a bust cycle. Oil was something like $15.00 a barrel, but Westjet was starting up, and growing fast. Shaw Communications moved from Edmonton and CP moved from Montreal. Around that same time he Alberta government privatized some divisions, and a lot of those jobs moved to Calgary, I was involved in one of those projects. Even with oil in the tank Calgary was going gangbusters. Since that time, oil has had it's boom bust cycles, but the city seems to be less affected by them and grow even when oil is in a down cycle. I think it's why Calgary has been pedal to the metal for like 25 or 30 years straight.

Agreed with all, Edmonton was larger than Calgary up until the early 80s or so, than the Getty and Klein years happened after that. I would say those Premiers are mainly responsible for Calgary overtaking Edmonton in population, given their focus on privatization at the detriment of the public sector in Edmonton, as the capital.

I reckon when the 2026 Census results are released, we will see the Edmonton CMA overtake the Ottawa-Gatineau CMA as the 5th largest in the country, given Edmonton has really narrowed Ottawa's lead over the last few years. With Carney's cuts to the Federal Public Service over the next bit, I can really see it happening.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by Echoes

Of the SK CMAs, Saskatoon getting to close to 400K and Regina on the cusp of 300K.

I'd love to see Saskatoon at half a million, and Regina between 350-400k. Saskatoon is one of my fav Canadian cities. It's unfortunate many Canadians have never been there let alone Saskatchewan overall.

Originally Posted by north 42

Nice to see Niagara over 500k now. I was hoping Windsor would have been closer, but I guess we’ll have to wait a bit longer to get there. We have a new huge mega hospital starting construction this year also, much much needed for sure. We are finally getting a second larger Costco this year too!

Thanks. Niagara Region had already been over 500k for a couple of years now, but good to see the CMA reach that milestone.

Windsor at ~489k is so close. Glad to hear your area is getting a new mega hospital as well. St. Catharines built a huge 1M square foot hospital in 2013, and this South Niagara hospital u/c will be 30% larger!

[Taeolas]

As has been talked about in the Atlantic Stats thread, Shediac, NB is tipping into CA territory, and by Stats Cans rules, it should get swalled up into Moncton's CMA right away. That would put Moncton firmly in the 220's in a single jump.

Ahead of Moncton is St John's, Sherbrooke and Barrie, all in the 240/250's. If Moncton's growth rate keeps outpacing those three cities, there is a decent chance Moncton can crack the Top 20 in Canada.

A lot can change in the years to come, especially with Abbotsford in the mix; Abbotsford could very well block Moncton and leave it in 21st. Kelowna is already in 19th and it's growth is likely going to keep it safely ahead of Moncton regardless.

Still, the chance for an NB city in the Top 20 is something I didn't think would be possible. Not in the modern era at least.

[giallo]

Originally Posted by biguc

That's why it's so surprising! We're about the same age, and all my life I've heard of Kelowna as this crazy boom town. For a western-Canadian city it's decently urban. And now it's even got a pretty tall skyline going. In my mind it's a city of 450k. The reality surprises me.

People probably think Kelowna is bigger than it is because they're thinking of the entire Okanagan Lake region, which Kelowna is the centre of. From Vernon to Penticton, it's all very tight-knit, with Kelowna in the middle, offering a lot of services/retail that can't be found in the other cities and towns, so there is a lot of traffic flowing into Kelowna from the north and south. Vernon is 40 minutes away, and Penticton is about an hour out.

Within this region, you have around 400,000 people.

[zoomer]

I think Saskatchewan needs to revamp their tourism strategy - how I'm not sure. There is the prairie grasslands, rivers, lakes, sand dunes, forests etc. but if you're flying from Central or Eastern Canada, or the West Coast you might say to yourself I'll just go to Alberta to see the same and as an added bonus get the mountains and a couple big cities to boot.

So what's the Saskatchewan advantage? I guess similar to how Newfoundland and Nova Scotia market themselves (although they have the ocean) is the friendliness of the people, slow pace of life, basically an escape from the big city and the ability to connect with people and nature in a deeper way. Maybe a better coordination of events across the province during the summer season - building on the marketing success of the Riders, perhaps travel packages that focus on the Canadian prairies, starting in Winnipeg with stops in Saskatchewan and ending up in Alberta. A concert series along the same route which music fans could follow over a period of a few weeks. Festival sites in iconic locations with RV camping and tenting on site yet near enough to towns/cities so they get some spinoff effect. Imagine if Saskatoon had a Stampede type event, even a quarter of the size. Once people get there I think they would be enticed to return. Some of my favourite cities are the smaller ones from 200,000 to 600,000 as long as they're urban enough.

K, back to the populations, I'm also surprised how far Kelowna has pulled ahead of Kamloops, maybe that gap narrows in the decades ahead, hard to say. I think we'll also see Nanaimo eventually become a bigger draw, they just need a jump start on the downtown which is slowly occurring as growth there has been steady.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Architype

in 1901 metros weren't much of a thing. You either lived in the city or in the country; suburbs didn't exist except as country homes for the rich, and agricultural areas. People didn't commute, there were no cars to speak of, and railways weren't suited to daily commuting in most areas. According to google, using today's boundaries, Toronto at that time would have been about 238,000, and I assume that would have been equivalent to a "metro" area in 1901. In Vancouver's case, New Westminster was a separate established city and would have been the largest part of a metro, having about 6,500 people, and the surrounding rural areas might have totaled 5,000.

I don't think this is really correct. It's true that car commuting was much less prevalent but there were streetcars and horses as well as ferries and the municipalities were much smaller.

A good example to illustrate this is Westmount which is a separate city from Montreal but only a few km from downtown, and was served by the streetcar. The interurban connected Vancouver with New Westminster. In Halifax there was the Dartmouth ferry and commuter rail literally called "The Suburban" running out to Rockingham/Bedford and onward. These are just some examples I know of (and I think Toronto had North York, Etobicoke, and others). It was common for a settlement to be built around some body of water and for each side to be a separate municipality.

[Surrealplaces]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

This is just not true. Alberta lives and dies with the oil and gas industry. I believe it was Peter Lougheed tried unsuccessfully to diversify the economy, but in the end, it did not work.

Now that we have Danielle Smith and the UCP in charge, they are doubling down on the oil and gas industry, and are actually impeding efforts to diversify the economy, especially regarding green energy.

What he said is true. His statement that Calgary and Edmonton are moving away from oil and gas is the case. Perhaps not as much for the province as a whole.
Alberta still relies heavily on oil and gas but the two metros have been relying less on it as time goes on. A solid indicator would be in the 2015-2019 period when oil was in the tank and oil companies were laying off thousands of people. Both cities still had solid population growth.

Here's a graphic showing jobs related to oil and gas (direct and indirect) for both cities. The job numbers have stayed static for most part, but both city's populations and workforce numbers have gone up by 200,000 workers, and you can see the percentage dropping.


Source