Think tank promoting second Hudson Bay port By: Gabrielle Piché Posted: 5:56 PM CST Monday, Dec. 8, 2025

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 08/12/2025 (251 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

A Maritime security think tank is promoting a second port on Hudson Bay, calling it a relief valve as Port of Churchill operations ramp up.

The proposed NeeStaNan project — roughly 15 hours by boat from the Port of Churchill — has gained support from the National Centre of Excellence and Innovation in Maritime Security.

“The hardest point, I think, that people need to get their head around is that shift in culture away from the competitive to the cooperative,” said Allan McDougall, who wrote a discussion paper titled “The Case for NeeStaNan” on behalf of the centre.

McDougall has written books on transportation systems and formerly held management roles with the feds, including as Transport Canada’s senior inspector for ports.

He and a group of academics and past federal management formed the think tank last year. They felt maritime security lacked a holistic view, McDougall said.

He watched the Port of Churchill gain national attention as Canada sought nation-building projects. It’s touted as a gateway to Europe and is the country’s only rail-accessible deep-water Arctic port.

“The hardest point, I think, that people need to get their head around is that shift in culture away from the competitive to the cooperative.”

“I am not saying that Churchill is a bad idea,” McDougall said. “Churchill is a very isolated port.”

He began searching for alternate ports nearby, should something go awry at the cold-water terminal. The Port of Vancouver can divert to the Port of Prince Rupert, McDougall noted.

He found NeeStaNan Utility Corridor. A group of Indigenous leaders aim to ship exports such as liquified natural gas, potash and containers through Port Nelson, a few hundred kilometres south of Churchill. The site is currently a ghost town.

The former Progressive Conservative government committed $6.7 million for a feasibility study of Port Nelson, contingent on funding from Alberta and Saskatchewan. The project would connect Fort McMurray, Alta. to the Hudson Bay, a 2023 news release reads.

The money didn’t materialize after the New Democrats took office, NeeStaNan’s director said.

McDougall took interest in the site and created a 14-page discussion paper after contacting NeeStaNan; he didn’t charge the entity, a director said.

“When you have a two-port solution… you have better risk management.”

McDougall’s paper argues a single point of failure — for example, a labour dispute or rail line hold-up — would disrupt the Port of Churchill’s entire transportation system. It also questions how much the port is able to expand.

The nearest major port is roughly 820 nautical miles away in Iqaluit. Port Nelson would be around 110 nautical miles away, making it a closer option for ships needing a new docking spot, the paper reads.

“When you have a two-port solution… you have better risk management,” McDougall said, adding it’s a reassurance to customers.

The paper proposes the two ports share resources such as dredging, marine engineering and staff training.

It names Bird — some 250 km from the Port of Churchill and 116 km from Port Nelson — as a shared services hub. Port Nelson doesn’t have a direct road connection by rail to Bird.

NeeStaNan took the discussion paper to the Manitoba government, said director Bryan Hart. (McDougall and colleagues also wrote a 42-page strategy on the subject.)

“We are not trying to compete with Churchill,” Hart said, adding he believes there’d be enough demand for both ports.

“Once the western Hudson Bay is perceived as a reliable, consistent, low-risk, value-added shipping option, then everything changes.”

“We are not trying to compete with Churchill.”

Fox Lake Cree Nation leads NeeStaNan. Hart and colleagues estimate the project’s initial cost — including port infrastructure and a rail extension from Amery — would cost $1 billion.

The total development, including a natural gas liquefication plant, a natural gas pipeline and road creation, could reach $72 billion.

“Our belief is that once governments signal their support for the project, the bulk of the capital investment will be privately financed,” Hart said.

Companies would likely build the natural gas pipeline and other infrastructure, he said. He’s hoping government will help fund a Port Nelson feasibility study; he hasn’t received a green light from Manitoba, he said.

Trade Minister Jamie Moses didn’t directly comment on Port Nelson when asked. Instead, in a statement, he pointed to investments in the Port of Churchill and rail line as strengthening access and economic development “for all northern communities.”

Manitoba has tabbed $87.5 million for the Port of Churchill and Hudson Bay rail line. Ottawa has spent more than $300 million.

NeeStaNan will likely have a “hard time” convincing governments to develop both ports simultaneously, said Barry Prentice, a University of Manitoba supply chain management professor.

(Environmental studies on Port Nelson will take years, McDougall said.)

Diverting ships from the Port of Churchill to Port Nelson during the winter would be difficult, Prentice said: “I don’t think you’d go right through the middle (with an icebreaker) during the middle of the winter.”

He questioned how Port Nelson would be the antidote to Port of Churchill labour disputes; both sites would likely house staff from the same unions.

The Port of Churchill already has port infrastructure and a local workforce, Prentice noted. Still, the site has its own concerns, he continued: part of the Hudson Bay rail line is vulnerable to permafrost; it’s unclear where all equipment will be stored in Churchill.

Arctic Gateway Group became owner of the Port of Churchill and Hudson Bay Railway in 2018. Chris Avery, its president, didn’t directly address Port Nelson when asked.

“We welcome any discussion about improving northern transportation, but our priority remains clear,” a statement from Avery reads.

“The greatest opportunity for strengthening Canada’s northern economy and building a resilient, world-class Arctic trade corridor lies in fully realizing the potential of the Port of Churchill.”

The first shipment of critical minerals in more than 20 years — 10,000 tonnes of zinc concentrate — left the port last year. The amount was expected to double in 2025.

gabrielle.piche@winnipegfreepress.com

Gabrielle Piché
Reporter

Gabrielle Piché reports on business for the Free Press. She interned at the Free Press and worked for its sister outlet, Canstar Community News, before entering the business beat in 2021. Read more about Gabrielle.

Every piece of reporting Gabrielle produces is reviewed by an editing team before it is posted online or published in print — part of the Free Press‘s tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.