What I meant is that, by virtue of better farmland attracting more settlers, you'd have more people up in the Canadian Prairies than south of the 49th lobbying for the NPR to pass through their town.
The NPR was chartered in 1864 and was constructed from 1870-1883. During this time period, the whole region in question is very sparsely populated both north and south of the 49th parallel, with Minnesota alone having a larger population than the entirety of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas combined. Even if every single settler who would've made their home between Fargo and Spokane decides to settle north of the 49th parallel, if the railroad is being built and settlement taking place on anything like their OTL schedules, there are simply not going to be enough of them to convince anyone who matters that it's worth forcing the railroad to go hundreds of miles out of its way to service a bunch of insignificant frontier towns.
 
The NPR was chartered in 1864 and was constructed from 1870-1883. During this time period, the whole region in question is very sparsely populated both north and south of the 49th parallel, with Minnesota alone having a larger population than the entirety of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas combined. Even if every single settler who would've made their home between Fargo and Spokane decides to settle north of the 49th parallel, if the railroad is being built and settlement taking place on anything like their OTL schedules, there are simply not going to be enough of them to convince anyone who matters that it's worth forcing the railroad to go hundreds of miles out of its way to service a bunch of insignificant frontier towns.
The second point I was trying to make is still valid, though. With the NPR ending in Seattle, Vancouver becoming the main city in the Pacific North-West isn't going to happen, regardless of how good a natural harbor it has.
 
Top