• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Sylvia J.
    June 28, 2013 - 08:40

    Four million cut from Tourism Advertising in the 2013 Budget. Considering how reliant Newfoundland and Labrador are on the tourist industry, can you tell me how that makes sense?

  • DON II
    May 24, 2013 - 10:20

    It appears that Minister French is reluctant to undertake an independent investigation to locate the original site of the Cupers Cove Plantation. It appears that an independent investigation would require the Minister to admit that the department of Tourism expropriated the land, approved funding to build the site, entered into agreements and designated the expropriated land in Cupids as a Provincial Historic Site without having undertaken any due diligence or an independent investigation to confirm where the original Cupers Cove Plantation was actually located in 1610! It appears that it is much easier to just accept the unsubstantiated claim that Cupids is Cupers Cove and to continue to promote Cupids as being the place where John Guy established the Cupers Cove Plantation in 1610! It appears that the site in Cupids had not been independently verified as the authentic site of the Cupers Cove Plantation prior to being designated and funded as a Provincial Historic Site and the fictional name of the Cupids Cove Plantation was substituted instead! The historical maps and documents clearly show that there was no place called Salmon Cove located near to Cupids Cove in the 1600's! John Guy clearly stated in his letter dated October 6, 1610 that Cupers Cove was a branch of Salmon Cove. The historical maps clearly show that the Salmon Cove referred to by John Guy in 1610 was located near to Avondale and not near Cupids! It appears that the Minister of Tourism was not interested in confirming these facts and chose instead to create the fictional Cupids Cove Plantation, a place which is NEVER mentioned in the entire historical record of Newfoundland! It appears that the Government of Newfoundland does not want to admit to having made a mistake in Cupids!

  • Philip Bishop
    May 22, 2013 - 13:39

    An interesting exercise is to read Henry Crout's journal 1612-13 and attempt to overlay the sites and activities of the plantation as described by him onto the main site of the archaeological dig in Cupids. For me, it just doesn't fit. Gilleon Cell admitted that she was not aware of the change in Salmom Cove location but yet she did say that most likely the 'Avon' referred to in Guy's and Crout's documents is present day 'Avondale'. I know that even with the available documents kept by Guy, Crout and others, that, because of the millions spent to develop and publicise the earlier John Guy story, an open minded study will not take place and the real historical facts will remain undisclosed. It will take good archaeological findings from the site to convince me that John Guy spent any time in what is now Cupids. By now Mr Gilbert should have some of this evidence.

  • concerned citizen
    May 19, 2013 - 13:33

    Don ll certainly has a point here. if you visit the memorial university archives site and go to digital maps you'll find maps of Coupers Cove near todays Avondale as late as 1719. Avondale was incorropted in 1901 and renamed from Salmon Cove to Avondale . John Guy wrote he landed in a place called Coupers Cove near Salmon Cove . Back in 1910 information was not available as it is today;but there's no excuse for such confusion today, unless there,s a hidden agenda. I,ve heard of a masterplan, could this be an excuse to acquire land for this purpose???? Who knows. I've heard the Municipal Plans are being re-written and I can almost bet the area around the dig site will be deemed as hertitage,making it worthless to the landowners.

  • DON II
    May 17, 2013 - 13:41

    When is Minister Terry French going to provide information to the public and to tourists that explains why the Department of Tourism established and named the Cupids Cove Plantation Provincial Historic Site in Cupids which commemorates a place that is never mentioned in the historical record of Newfoundland? Why is the Cupids Cove Plantation being commemorated as an historic site of significance when it is never mentioned anywhere in the entire historical record of Newfoundland? Similar remains of 17th century homesteads can be found almost anywhere in longstanding inhabited areas of Conception Bay, Trinity Bay, Placentia Bay and the Southern Shore. It appears that the Cupids Cove Plantation site in Cupids is also being portrayed as the site of the historic Cupers Cove Plantation? Which is it? It appears that the site of the historic Cupers Cove Plantation was originally claimed to have been located in Cupids. It appears that the Government of Newfoundland had no evidence which conclusively proved that the Cupers Cove Plantation ever existed in Cupids and decided to create the fictional Cupids Cove Plantation instead. It appears that the Government of Newfoundland ignored the existence of numerous historic maps, letters and documents in the historical record of Newfoundland which show that the authentic historic Cupers Cove Plantation was originally located near the modern day town of Avondale! If the Government of Newfoundland could conclusively prove that the authentic historic Cupers Cove Plantation actually existed in Cupids it would have established the Cupers Cove Plantation Provincial Historic Site in Cupids and not a fictional replacement!