Course:GEOG350/2024/Tent Cities in Vancouver

From UBC Wiki

Introduction

This chapter discusses Vancouver’s tent cities and the various methods the local government has used to house, remove, or otherwise displace its residents, and the results on the residents mental health, environment, and sense of place. This chapter focuses on place, placelessness, and spatial inequality (section two), discussing how the government’s ways of dealing with the tent cities alienate the residents, without providing or distributing enough care to undo the damage caused. Detachment to the city can cause mental health issues among tent city residents, especially those marginalized by other societal forces, and the destruction of tent cities is a removal of community for those who already struggle with finding one. The situation is largely framed through the language of mental health and addictions,[1] but the government often fails to recognize how their actions often exacerbate mental health issues through their improper care of displaced residents.

First, the government's destruction of tent cities will be discussed. Local governments’ behaviors towards its most vulnerable residents do little to make them feel belonging, instead marginalizing them, investing resources and time into keeping them out of sight more than giving them what they need. More importantly, this chapter places focus on the methods of removal and also the actions after removal, providing inadequate care to the residents they harmed through displacement. Police actions create unsafe spaces for many, and tear down the limited spaces and communities that the residents do have. This spatial inequality continues in the design and maintenance of certain spaces, like SROs or Single Room Occupancies, which are notorious for being considered as dirty and unlivable conditions.[2] This chapter also focuses on the concepts of belonging, arguing that the actions of police tear down a sense of belonging, with unhoused youth saying "it seems like you aren't really allowed to be homeless in downtown Vancouver anymore".[1] Stigma surrounding SROs dissuade personal attachment as people don't want to feel like they belong there, and constant evictions create a fragile sense of home.[1] Finally, this chapter focuses on what could be done instead, and what community methods have worked for tent city residents and the unhoused population of Vancouver.

Spatial inequality and representation of place are relevant topics within human geography, as their effects are abundant not just within Vancouver, but within many spaces across the urban world. An ongoing battle exists between how a city wants to be represented, contrasted with the reality of the living experience for many. When discussing Vancouver's actions towards tent cities, it is important to keep in mind the image that Vancouver wants to uphold to the outside world, and the reasons why they would rather hide, ignore, or marginalize the unhoused population instead of giving them proper care. In Vancouver, the city's struggle with housing residents is seen by many as a stain on its reputation, and with constant displacements, tent city residents feel that the local government is "embarrassed" by the tent cities, especially ones like the original CRAB Park location which was visible from cruise ships at Canada Place,[3] a common spot for tourists.

Overview of issue/focus

Vancouver's housing situation is poor. Existing in a local scale but being a global market, surges of overseas capital have rapidly inflated the price of housing in Metro Vancouver within the past decades.[4] As a result, lots of Vancouver's citizens, especially those in poorer areas like the Downtown Eastside, are unable to keep up with the housing prices and end up unhoused. Gentrification also drives up housing prices in previously affordable neighborhoods. As people cannot afford houses, they often end up living in tents, and it is not uncommon for tent cities to be created in areas like public parks, enforcing strength in numbers and creating a safety net and a community.

Median price of housing in Vancouver over the years.

However, Vancouver's history with tent cities has been a struggle, with an ongoing back and forth about their legality, the safety concerns for the general public and the residents, with the discussion almost always coming around to the question 'where will the residents go if you take down the tent city?' In the past, the residents of tent cities often found themselves on an institutional trajectory, with urban poverty leading to government intervention.[1] During the HIV/AIDS crisis, services offered shelter, food, and healthcare, which continues to this day.[1] But as the housing market skyrocketed, so did the unhoused population, and the government's solutions became more and more ineffective and inadequate for the growing needs of the unhoused population. Communities took matters into their own hands, sticking together to enforce strength in numbers and create a shared safer space. One result of this is tent cities, increasing in frequency throughout the 00s and 10s, which caused tension with the local government.[5]

The destruction of tent cities in Vancouver is common, averaging one major removal every year for the past decade.[6] It’s not just Vancouver, but many major cities in Canada, like Edmonton, clearing dozens of encampments in the winter of 2023 to 2024, alongside Prince George, Calgary, Regina, Kingston, and more.[7] Many urban cities in North America struggle with housing issues, but Vancouver and areas of the Pacific Northwest are often highlighted because of their location. The West Coast is seen by many as an attractive place to live, and has seen a large spike in real estate prices over time.[4] As a result, these places have an increased price of living, leading to a higher and higher unhoused population, leading to more tent cities, which ultimately ends with city removal and displacement. While the methods of displacement vary from city to city, one thing among them seems to stay the same: the solutions are rarely permanent and often poorly managed, not giving the residents the support they need. Considering the incredibly high price of housing in Vancouver, this sentiment is especially true to this city. Oftentimes, tent cities reappear after they are torn down, with some residents even outright saying "I'll wait a day or two, and I'll come right back. That's what we did last time".[6] Many unhoused people in Vancouver have negative and harmful experiences with government services and care, whether about physical or mental health, or even sense of place, meaning they're reluctant to follow their orders and would rather rely on the community. While the state hasn't resorted to abandonment after displacement, perpetual changes, evictions, and repeated teardowns of tent cities as they pop up mean for many the government interventions and support do not create a sense of place or home,[1] which is considered very important for proper support.

Oppenheimer Park's tent city in 2019.

David Bradbury, a former resident of the Oppenheimer Park tent city, before it was removed in 2024, has said “It’s disgusting. It’s a BC housing crisis is what it is [...] Where do you want these people to go?”.[8] The methods of removal of tent cities are especially harsh in BC, with the BC Civil Liberties Association arguing that the combination of forceful displacement and the negligence and lack of proper care or relocation afterwards is a “cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment”.[8] The methods of removal make their message clear, that the residents and tent cities are not welcome and do not belong where they currently are. But the spaces of their proposed relocations are so poor it creates a general placelessness: they are to believe that they do not belong anywhere. “The reality is: there isn’t enough shelter space in [Vancouver]”.[9] “A lot of people are [in tent cities] because of the shelter system, because it doesn’t work for them”.[10] If these resources and services only work for a specific few, and the tent cities are removed, what happens to those who fall in between? What does it mean for their physical health, and for their mental health and sense of identity? The government’s dehumanizing approaches to removing tent cities in Vancouver alienate the residents, and the lack of proper support for those displaced do nothing to alleviate the dissociation of Vancouver’s most vulnerable residents.

Tent cities are a multifaceted issue which don't have an easy solution. But the current actions taken by the government do not help, with the most progress being made through personal and direct care from volunteers and charity organizations, which aim to integrate the residents within the community rather than displace them.[11] If the city wants to move forwards in a just way, proper support must be the priority when dealing with these issues which affect marginalized and vulnerable residents the most. But currently, they do not. Community groups understand the complex difficulty when dealing with the housing crisis, and especially the differing levels of care needed to cement a sense of place with certain residents. Over half of all unhoused people in Vancouver live with two or more serious health conditions.[12] Being already a vulnerable population, the dangerous living conditions only make the situation worse, especially among youth who "frequently acknowledged that they lived with the possibility of overdosing and the possibility of death".[1] It is clear that different approaches are needed to address this issue, and certainly approaches vastly different from the many methods of removal the local government and police have tried, outlined in the case study below.

Case Study of the issue

CRAB Park removal

In Vancouver, tent cities are often removed or destroyed suddenly and without warning. In response to confiscation of personal belongings, some residents have taken action and brought the issues to a higher authority. Jason Hebert, a former CRAB Park tent city resident, has said "[police] seem to think that they can take my possessions and throw them out in the dump [...] I got fed up with that. So I, and other people, went forward to the judges".[13] In 2022, the BC Supreme court ruled that Vancouver's frequent eviction orders were unjust.[13] Furthermore, the Supreme Court ruled that the SROs and shelter spots being offered to the residents of tent cities were inadequate, thus stopping some tent cities from being destroyed, including CRAB Park.[3] But as Vancouver's Mayor changed in October of 2022, different attitudes were displayed. In April 2023, the East Hastings tent city saw an "unusually aggressive" removal of tents and belongings.[3] In March 2024, the city announced that the CRAB Park needed a cleanup, and deemed certain elements of the tent city as unsafe, including a makeshift two-storey house.[3] Some residents agreed that the camp needed to be cleaned up, and the city moved forwards, citing safety and fire hazards. Deputy city managers claimed media would have access and coverage, but on the day of the cleanup, reporters and advocates were not allowed past the fencing set up around the perimeter.[3] The cleanup was rather aggressive, including cutting open one of the structures to gain entrance, which was later remarked as a decision that "resulted in dismay and unnecessary tension".[3] In April 2024, the city managers announced the cleanup effort was the first step in closing and relocating the CRAB Park camp for good.[3] But their proposed relocation was undesirable. The area of relocation was gravel covered, much smaller than the previous, allowing less than half the amount of tents as before, and park rangers told residents they weren't allowed to use wooden bed frames or foam mattresses, citing fire hazards.[3] CRAB Park advocates also state that the new site is worse for residents since they weren't allowed to put their tents on raised platforms, meaning their tents were more susceptible to heavy rain, and water got inside tents.[3]

Before and after of CRAB Park, courtesy of The Tyee

Reasons for tent city removal

Fire is a common concern among those who are for the removal of tent cities. In 2022, fires burnt down residential hotels in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside, meaning the former residents set up tents on the sidewalks, which was a fire hazard too.[14]

Winters Hotel destroyed after the fire in 2022.

But the actions taken against the tent cities as fire hazards are criticized as authoritarian by many, sparking many debates on the police's role in the community and enforcement of safety.[14] On August 9th, police entered East Hastings to enforce fire orders, but instead "attacked a man in emotional distress in the Carnegie Community Center [and] people from the tent city".[14] The unnecessary force common to tent city removals drew the attention of city councilors, asking whether police had the authority to make political decisions surrounding the unhoused population. A research report by Stop The Sweeps Coalition estimated around $2.5k worth of personal property was destroyed in a 5 day period in 2021.[14] City councilor Jean Swanson pitched to the city council a motion to start a community program which would give over $300k to the community to work together and solve this problem, creating a divide between the city council and the Vancouver Police Department.[14] In 2022, when the police set to remove the East Hastings tent city, they used more force: barricading the street, barring advocates, media, legal observers, shutting off traffic cameras, and observers have claimed to have seen police on rooftops wielding rifles.[14] While the BC Supreme Court ruling stated that the police couldn't lawfully displace a tent city without first providing housing, the police worked using a fire order from the Vancouver fire chief Karen Fry, which is invulnerable to court appeal.[14] Karen Fry is named as "notorious for her anti-tent city fire orders" when she was Fire Chief in Nanaimo.[14]

Among fire concerns, it is also common to see concerns about the safety of tent city residents and the general public. Mayor Ken Sim has said that "women, and particularly Indigenous women" were assaulted in the East Hastings tent city before its removal, however the DTES Women's Centre and Battered Women's Support Services argued that their displacement would put Indigenous and other unhoused women in greater danger.[14] Tent cities do have a history of violent incidents, but they can also be a safer space for some compared to their alternatives. Randan, a resident of CRAB Park, left an SRO to live at the tent city because "his partner did not feel safe at the [SRO]",[3] and advocates supporting tent cities say they are "necessary to provide a community and safety in numbers".[3]

Police autonomy in tent city removal

Vancouver's Downtown Eastside and surroundings.

Vancouver Police Department Chief Adam Palmer discusses the safety of the tent cities in an interview with CBC, saying “[most people] think this is not a safe area, and they’re right, it’s not a safe area”.[6] In regards to the 2023 teardown of a tent city on Hastings Street, he said “we’re there to restore some public safety”.[6] But the removal of tent cities is not a solution for the general public either. CBC reporters asked business owners in the Downtown Eastside “Since the tents have been removed, what have you seen? Do you feel like things have improved for you?” The response was “No, definitely not. It’s increased.”, continuing on to describe how a worker had been harassed by someone seeking to enter the building.[15] Whose safety is considered the most important to the police? As mentioned earlier, residents have expressed that they believe the SROs to be more unsafe than the street, not to mention the risk in relocation, which affects different groups of people disproportionately. “Even when there is shelter space, it might not be a fit for every person. Some women and LGBTQ2S+ people don’t feel safe in all shelters, and not all shelters are equipped to fit the unique needs of seniors”.[9] The displacement of the residents also makes it harder to check in on them, “Once displaced, people are a lot harder to find [...] the relationships between unhoused folks and support workers become strained”,[9] or put additional pressure on nearby hospitals. Not to mention, the supplies like tents and blankets taken away and eventually trashed pose serious health problems as cold weather arrives, “every item or tent lost requires work to regain”.[9] Latoya Farrell of the B.C Civil Liberties Association has said “I think that this is a huge infringement on humanity and people’s lives that they are being put at risk on the coldest day of the year”, in response to the removal of the Oppenheimer Park tent city in 2024.[8]

An ongoing debate revolves around the authority of police in these scenarios. They have a level of autonomy as an institution,[14] and act in coordination with political parties, having different levels of power depending on who's elected. Their power over the residents of tent cities is large and often on display, regardless of the political forces that act around them. Anna Cooper, a lawyer from Pivot Legal Society, regarding the issue has stated that "forced evictions to nowhere run afoul of multiple human rights issues".[16] "[Fire safety] is not the only public safety issue, and it cannot be addressed in a way that's to the exclusion of other safety issues".[16] As police and the fire department removed tents in the Downtown Eastside on an emergency fire order, BC Housing put out a statement saying: “We have been clear with the City of Vancouver and Vancouver Fire Rescue Services that, on short notice, we do not have access to large numbers of new spaces in Vancouver to accommodate the timing of the emergency order”,[16] but this did not stop the police from proceeding, showing a discrepancy in their actions by enforcing public safety while also threatening it.

Aftermath of tent city removal

In Vancouver, the options provided to the displaced residents of destroyed tent cities are few. Forcible displacement does little to them when their alternatives are worse, and some residents have expressed a clear disapproval towards them, quote “The options that were offered to me weren’t good options … I cannot be in an SRO, don’t want to be in an SRO”.[6] Joshua Coyne, an SRO resident, has called the conditions “unlivable” or “atrocious”, adding that “It’s not really for me, it’s for the people that can’t take care of themselves”.[2] The buildings are poorly maintained, and Coyne continued “None of the other staff did anything to clean. I called them [...] and they said ‘Oh, we know. We have a staff member that’s not here and we don’t have anyone to take care of it’”.[2] The unsanitary conditions are considered even unhealthier than living on the street, to the point where the residents believe “the government needs to take over the management of the building or the building needs to be closed down”.[2]

Interior of a Single Room Occupancy, courtesy of CBC Vancouver

The government isn't managing the buildings of their proposed relocations, which means that they often become too run down to live in, unlike the tent cities which they destroy. This gap between what they take away and what they give back creates a large imbalance, to the point where the displaced residents face a ‘solution’ which actually worsens the conditions for them. Fascinatingly, there is a spatial inequality between the unhoused population subject to government intervention and those who the government leaves alone, with the residents receiving the ‘aid’ ending up in a worse location and overall situation.

It’s also very important to see how sense of identity is linked to place with the residents of SROs, for example Coyne believing the SRO wasn’t for him. The conditions of the SROs are considered so poor that Coyne draws a line between himself and who he believes needs the facility. Because of his ability to “take care” of himself, he expresses that he doesn’t really belong in the space. There is an underlying stigma against SROs, maybe because of how poorly they are maintained or how little of a solution they are, which leads many displaced residents of tent cities to self-identify as not belonging in them, linking their identity and perception of themselves to the space they belong in.

Lesson learned

Forcible displacement and destruction of tent cities is not the solution, and is not even best for business owners. Furthermore, it is extremely harmful to the residents mental health, and sense of place and belonging. Not only that, but poses significant harm to their physical health as they lose the support group they need, and also they become harder to find, meaning that support workers cannot frequently check in on them.[9] Medical providers have discussed the effects of homelessness on mental health, stating "housing [is] the most basic social determinant of health".[12] With instability and a sense of placelessness, heavy stress is put on the residents.

The police's authority over the tent city removal should be questioned, including repeated harmful incidents which should open the floor to alternative methods of relocation, at the minimum. Furthermore, the government's proposed areas of relocation, especially SROs, are poorly managed and a temporary solution. With frequent evictions and poor upkeep they care less about the residents and more about moving them out of public spaces and sight. Ultimately, the most effective solutions have come from the community, and the government needs to learn from the community to understand how to properly support the growing unhoused population. Community care programs have been shown to improve the quality of life and diagnosis of unhoused patients.[12] A study asked healthcare providers and unhoused patients in Vancouver about their experiences with each other. One patient described a healthcare system as "the most helpful organization to me",[12] and others emphasized the importance of mental health teams, and those willing to build a real relationship, "going out for coffee and talking".[12]

However, an important lesson to learn about distribution of care is that it's not that simple. According to a survey, one of the biggest challenges is getting the people what they need in time, finding that only half of hospitalized unhoused patients saw a care provider in the month prior to hospitalization.[12] Furthermore, not everyone requires the same type of care, and the intersectional identities of the unhoused population should be taken into account. For example, eating and substance abuse disorders are heavily linked to social and economic dynamics, something which is overlooked by service providers when addressing unhoused youth.[17] Some youth have said they wouldn't feel comfortable discussing eating disorders with staff at a local shelter.[17] Furthermore, economic status and marginalization influences the body image concerns among unhoused youth.[17]

There is no 'easy fix' that the government wants. Providing proper care to the unhoused population cannot happen through mass changes, but needs to be facilitated on a case by case basis. While the government might not have the resources do to this themselves, they could utilize the community which is already supporting them and fund those groups instead of putting money into displacing the unhoused residents, destroying tent cities and making them harder to contact and support. What matters is a sense of place, belonging, and community integration. The Vancouver At Home examines the effects of off-site support on the unhoused population with mental illnesses, "with the hope that people with severe mental illness would participate and integrate into the mainstream community".[11] It emphasized as community integration as not just social, but as a physical and psychological process which included a deep rooting in sense of space. Societal stigmas around unhoused people is a barrier to community integration, especially those with long histories of relocation and uprooting, but after a period of adjustment and proper care, "they may feel supported in diverse settings in a broader community".[11] While this study has some methodological concerns including randomization or computer algorithms to determine level of care, it concluded that "access to safe, affordable housing and treatment for mental disorders and substance use is critical to social inclusion as well as access to employment".[11]

This lesson can be applied to other urban contexts. Vancouver isn't alone in it's struggle with housing prices, and while it may have among the highest unhoused population in North America, it can lead the way for other cities as an example of what to do correctly, instead of the lacking response it usually has. The stigma and notion surrounding substance abuse among the unhoused population is prevalent, but from the lessons learned above we can understand how much more it is than that, and how much more the government could do to help. "Most mental health and housing research has focused on developing services to change individuals rather than potential changes to communities or society that would support marginalized individuals".[11] Instead of making temporary solutions, cities around the world can create a permanent sense of place for the population. And it can start with the tent cities, the community-built spaces that are often one of few permanent spaces that the unhoused population has.

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Fast, Danya, and David Cunningham. “‘We Don’t Belong There’: New Geographies of homelessness, addiction, and Social Control in Vancouver’s Inner City.” City & Society, vol. 30, no. 2, Aug. 2018, pp. 237–262, https://doi.org/10.1111/ciso.12177.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Judd, Amy, and Christa Dao. “‘Cleaner on the Street’: Inside an SRO Hotel in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside.” Global News, 5 Jan. 2023, globalnews.ca/news/9387928/sro-vancouver-downtown-eastside-living-conditions
  3. ↑ 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.07 3.08 3.09 3.10 Denis, Jen St. “Vancouver Razed Crab Park’s Tent City. What’s Next?” The Tyee, 12 Apr. 2024, thetyee.ca/News/2024/04/10/Vancouver-Razed-CRAB-Park-Tent-City/
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Todd, Douglas. “Why Vancouver House Prices Became so out of Whack.” Vancouver Sun, 1 Feb. 2024, vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/douglas-todd-why-vancouver-housing-prices-became-so-out-of-whack-with-the-western-world.
  5. ↑ Baker, Paula, and Jennifer Okrusko. “A History of Tent Cities in the Lower Mainland and Fraser Valley.” Global News, 8 Oct. 2015, globalnews.ca/news/2264666/a-history-of-tent-cities-in-the-lower-mainland-and-fraser-valley/.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 McElroy, Justin. “A ‘sad Day’ on Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside -but One We’ve Seen Before.” CBC News, 6 Apr. 2023, cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/downtown-eastside-tent-removal-1.6803218
  7. ↑ Duffy, Andrew. “Tent City Nation: Are Canada’s Homeless Encampments Here to Stay?” Ottawa Citizen, 23 Feb. 2024, ottawacitizen.com/feature/tent-city-nation.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 McSheffrey, Elizabeth, and Alissa Thibault. “Police, Park Rangers Move in on Vancouver’s Oppenheimer Tent Encampment - BC.” Global News, 10 Jan. 2024, globalnews.ca/news/10214127/tentremoval-vancouver-oppenheimer-park
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 Blatta, Emily. “‘Devastating’ Oppenheimer Park Decampments Disrupt Vital Downtown Eastside Support Networks.” The Georgia Straight, 25 Jan. 2024, www.straight.com/city-culture/devastating-oppenheimer-park-decampments-disrupt-vital-downtown-eastside-support
  10. ↑ Zeidler, Maryse. “Some Residents Cleared out of East Hastings Street Encampment Moving into Nearby Crab Park.” CBC, 7 Apr. 2023, www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-downtown-eastside-encampment-clearing-crab-park-1.6805149
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 Patterson, Michelle L., Akm Moniruzzaman, and Julian M. Somers. "Community Participation and Belonging among Formerly Homeless Adults with Mental Illness After 12 Months of Housing First in Vancouver, British Columbia: A Randomized Controlled Trial." Community Mental Health Journal, vol. 50, no. 5, 2014/07, pp. 604-11. ProQuest, https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/community-participation-belonging-among-formerly/docview/1535194687/se-2, doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-013-9672-9.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 Yu, Alec Chu, et al. “Strengths, challenges, and gaps in linkage to primary care among hospitalized individuals who are homeless in Vancouver, British Columbia.” Journal of Social Distress and Homelessness, vol. 29, no. 2, 27 July 2019, pp. 84–94, https://doi.org/10.1080/10530789.2019.1648730.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Pitargue, Ali. “Crab Park Tent City Marks 2-Year Anniversary.” YouTube, CBC Vancouver, 23 May 2023, www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJAcq01cQOY
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 Drury, Ivan. “Power in Vancouver, Canada: Police Revolt and Hastings Tent City.” Against the Current, vol. 38, no. 2, May 2023, pp. 29–33. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=163440688&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
  15. ↑ Yeung, Lien. “Downtown Eastside Business Owners Asked If Tent Removals Helped | CBC Vancouver.” YouTube, CBC Vancouver, 20 May 2023, www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcxbyoP3mTY
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 Yeung, Lien. “Multiple Arrests Following Violence with Police as Tents Removed from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside | CBC News.” CBC News, 10 Aug. 2022, www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/tents-structures-downtown-eastside-vancouver-removal-1.6545853.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 Luongo, Nicole Marie. “Disappearing in plain sight: An exploratory study of co-occurring eating and substance abuse disorders among homeless youth in Vancouver, Canada.” Women’s Studies International Forum, vol. 67, 12 Jan. 2018, pp. 38–44, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2018.01.003.
This resource was created by Huxley Bragg.It is shared under a CC-BY 4.0 International License.



Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:GEOG350/2024/Tent_Cities_in_Vancouver&oldid=840793"