Introduction

At the conclusion of the Second World War in 1945, the USA and the USSR emerged as the two dominant world powers. With differing values, governments, and ideologies, tensions between these two nations quickly intensified, giving rise to what became known as the Cold War.¹ Because Canada was geographically located between these two superpowers, it became a key partner for North American air defence, leading to the establishment of the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD). The Canadian government’s commitment to NORAD was formalized through the 1957 bilateral agreement and was far-reaching in implications, though most Canadians remained generally unaware of NORAD’s role or significance.² Yet for the residents of North Bay, Ontario, where Canada’s only NORAD underground command bunker was built, daily life in this small city was reshaped by its operations.

In this essay, I offer a historical account of how the presence of NORAD, and the construction and operation of the bunker transformed the city’s employment, population, and physical environment. Its presence functioned as a “double-edged sword” for North Bay’s residents.³ Colloquially nicknamed “the hole”, it brought growth and newfound significance to the city while simultaneously making it a target for nuclear attack, ultimately shaping North Bay’s Cold War experience as distinct from the rest of the country.⁴

The Cold War and Canada’s Path to NORAD

In the post-war world, both the US and the USSR had visions fueled by security fears. The fear, for Americans and Canadians alike was the infiltration of Communism, one of the core elements of the Cold War, into the world at large, especially their own countries.⁵ By joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949, Canada solidified its place in a Western alliance and for the remainder of the Cold War would act to defend North America from Communism and, more imminently, nuclear weapons.⁶

Air defence systems across the North American continent had intertwined Canada and the US both tactically and technologically. To bypass the complicated and slow systems previously established to oversee the Canadian-US defence command, the United States Air Force (USAF) and the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) began communicating directly. Later, after the official binational agreement was reached, construction began on the NORAD underground bunker.⁷

With this relationship came ballistics, missiles, and the DEW line on Canadian soil, and concern grew over Canada’s control of these wartime measures. Though Canada remained in control of their own troops stationed with NORAD, the US possessed majority control over NORAD operations in both countries. This tension between Canada and the US in the early 60s in many ways overshadowed the successful partnership occurring at the NORAD compound in North Bay, in the minds of Canadians.⁸

North Bay as a Strategic Environment

North Bay, Ontario was chosen as the home for the underground bunker because of the important geographic features needed for the massive complex. This included access to large amounts of water, which was found in the nearby Trout Lake, and the pre-existing air base, home to one of only two BOMARC air defence missile squadrons in Canada.⁹ The most important draw to North Bay, was the pre-Cambrian shield that was thought to offer protection against mass nuclear weaponry.

The two-building structure built 600 feet below the surface and surrounded by granite was built between 1958-63 and cost roughly $51 million. The cost was split between the Canadian and US governments (with Canada paying only one third). The bunker included a gym, doctor’s offices, a barber shop, and a telephone network.¹⁰ The complex was home to the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system which allowed the faster processing of data, while strategic decisions could be made by humans, and served as an integral part of air defence systems in North America.¹¹ Beyond its functions as an air detection and defence complex, the bunker was equipped with diesel and water reservations as well as complex security, mechanical, and electronic systems which made the facility completely self-sufficient (housing up to 400 people) in the event of an attack.¹²

“[A] double-edged sword”: North Bay and the Bunker

Once the construction of the underground bunker was finished and operations had begun, daily life in North Bay could not escape the presence of the bunker and its personnel. While information on the daily operations of the bunker is unclear and lacking detail, we know it not only changed the lives of the city’s residents but also the surrounding environment and geography. The use of nearby Trout Lake for its cooling system, saw nearly 1.6 million gallons a day pumped from the lake, with two small reservoirs constructed to hold a combined 150,000 gallons for facility personnel.¹³ Further, the rock taken from the excavation of the bunker was used to make improvements to the city’s waterfront which is still there today.¹⁴

Employment and population increase were two other significant changes that “the hole” brought to North Bay. Military officers and personnel were brought to work in the bunker or the air base close by. In its peak operation, the bunker employed 700 people from both Canada and the US.¹⁵ As the population increased, from roughly 21,000 in 1956 to 23,000 residents 1961,¹⁶ the city prospered. This was a bustling time and brought much development to the city.¹⁷ An interview with long-term North Bay resident and retired nurse, Claudia Hall, 75, emphasized the impact of the bunker on people’s everyday lives.

Hall, born and raised in North Bay, recalled how “businesses thrived” because of the growing population. Hall was 13 when “the hole” started operating and recalls that, though most personnel lived on base “their kids went to school with us […] so it did impact everyday life.” Incoming military families brought new experiences and knowledge that diversified North Bay. In 1971, Hall graduated from nursing school and recounted working alongside nurses from the air base: “it broadened our exposure […] they had worked in different hospitals around the world and so there was this kind of learning back and forth.”¹⁸

In addition to these interpersonal changes, “the hole” also brought with it security concerns. For instance, schoolchildren in North Bay practiced safety drills of sitting under their desks with their hands in their laps in preparation of an attack. Although the radar and SAGE systems used in the bunker did very important work, to Hall, and many residents in North Bay, it was a “double-edged sword […] it made you a target […] and it was providing security.”¹⁹ Nuclear threat was very much on the minds of North Bay citizens in the 1960s; the bunker was a concrete reminder of the Soviet threat.

The Legacy of NORAD

As the Cold War drew to a close in the early 1990s, the future of this defining infrastructure came into question. Steps to modernizing NORAD, which at this point was almost 40 years old, began in 1998 with the proposal of a new, state-of-the-art Above-Ground-Complex (AGC). The AGC would replace the underground bunker and ease growing concerns about security breaches that had begun to circulate among NORAD authorities. The new complex took three years to build and by October 2006, “the hole” was officially decommissioned.²⁰ When interviewing Hall about the decommissioning of the bunker she shared, “it’s something that I think most people in North Bay were proud of and [were] sad when we saw it was decommissioned.”²¹

The NORAD agreement, however, continued to be renewed roughly every five years and in 2006 added maritime warning to its responsibilities. It still exists and continues to serve as a major security force in North America. In 2013, NORAD Next envisioned the future challenges the US and Canada might face in the period 2025-2030. Today, NORAD continues military operations between the two nations, including the training of air force personnel in various Arctic regions.²² Meanwhile, the vacant underground bunker in North Bay continues to leave a “hole” in the heart of the city’s citizens.

Hall’s reaction to the decommissioning was not unique. Across North Bay, the closing of the bunker was felt as a community loss.²³ Eventually, NORAD’s legacy drew the attention of heritage organizations beyond the city. In 2021, the National Trust for Canada placed the NORAD complex in North Bay on their list of endangered heritage sites. The Trust pushed the federal government to fund the modernization and continued use of the bunker, offering the space for a “digitization centre for archival audio and visual material.”²⁴ Similarly, Trevor Schindeler wrote in favour of funding the renewal of the complex in the North Bay Nugget in 2021. Schindeler argued the positive benefits of turning the complex into a tourist destination, noting the historical significance of the bunker: “I challenge anyone to identify a more important historical site in all of Canada.”²⁵

---

Notes

1. McMahon, Robert J.. Cold War : A Very Short Introduction.  (Oxford University Press, 2003), 17-20, ProQuest Ebook Central. ↩︎
2. Charron, Andrea, and James Fergusson. “Out of Sight, out of Mind NORAD Vis-à-Vis CANUS Politics.” Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 26, no. 2 (2020):139. doi:10.1080/11926422.2019.1670221. ↩︎
3. Claudia Hall, retired nurse and North Bay resident, in an interview with the author, March 15, 2026 ↩︎
4. “Power Cavern and Control Building” Parks Canada. Accessed March 3, 2026. ↩︎
5. Walker, William T.. McCarthyism and the Red Scare: A Reference Guide. (New York: Bloomsbury Publishing USA, 2011), 16, ProQuest Ebook Central. ↩︎
6. McMahon, Cold War Short Introduction, 17-20. ↩︎
7. Jockel, Joeseph T.. No Boundaries Upstairs: Canada, the United States, and the Origins of North American Air Defence, 1945-1958 (University of British Columbia Press, 1987), 102-107. ↩︎
8. Garrard, “Fearful Asymmetry,” 534. ↩︎
9. “A Brief History of NORAD” Office of the Command Historian, (2016), 22. ↩︎
10. Canadian Broadcast Museum Foundation, “A Submission to the Senate Committee on Transport and Communications’ Study on the Modernization of Canadian Communications Legislation,” (2018), 2-3. ↩︎
11. Jockel, 62. ↩︎
12. Parks Canada, “Power Cavern and Control Building” ↩︎
13. “CFB North Bay,” Military History of the Upper Great Lakes, published October 15, 2021, https://ss.sites.mtu.edu/mhugl/2019/10/21/cfb-north-bay/ ↩︎
14. Parks Canada, “Power Cavern and Control Building” ↩︎
15. Rich Williamson, Director, “The Hole in Reservoir Hill” CBC Documentary, 2018,13 min., 18 sec., https://www.cbc.ca/shortdocs/shorts/the-hole-in-reservoir-hill ↩︎
16. Dominion Bureau of Statistics, “1961 Census of Canada” (June 21, 1962), 35; Dominion Bureau of Statistics, “Population: Counties and Subdivisions” (April 4, 1957). ↩︎
17. Parks Canada, “Power Cavern and Control Building” ↩︎
18. Claudia Hall, interview ↩︎
19. Ibid. ↩︎
20. Security Intelligence Review Committee, “Review of a Counter Intelligence Investigation” (2008), 10-11. ↩︎
21. Claudia Hall, interview. ↩︎
22. “NORAD and U.S. Northern Command to conduct Arctic Edge 2026,” press release, February 23, 2026, https://www.norad.mil/Newsroom/Press-Releases/Article/4412244/norad-and-us-northern-command-to-conduct-arctic-edge-2026/ ↩︎
23. “How do you dismantle an underground bunker? DND studying how to decommission North Bay ‘hole’,” CBC News, April 18, 2021, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/dnd-north-bay-bunker-decommissioned-1.5985634 ↩︎
24. National Trust, “NORAD Complex” ↩︎
25. Schindeler, Trevor. “Decommissioning The Hole a sad move.” North Bay Nugget, 2021, https://www.nugget.ca/opinion/decommissioning-the-hole-a-sad-move ↩︎

---

Feature image: Image taken in 2026 of the entrance to the North Bay NORAD bunker. Image shows signs on the entrance gate to the compound, with the entrance to the tunnel in the background. The source of the image is the author’s personal archive.