Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Charles River: SPOT REPORT: Tour of Magazine Beach Destruction: Fraud gets Worse

Charles River: SPOT REPORT: Tour of Magazine Beach Destruction: Fraud gets Worse

1. Corrupt Games on trees.
a. Introduction.
b. Lying through word games.
c. Repeated and routine changes.
d. An excellent tree may be destroyed because it is in “decline”.
e. Bizarre SECRET definition of “trees”
f. Trees put in as part of the starvation wall will be redefined as “saved” trees.
2. Tiny opening in Starvation Wall.
3. Lawn to the river.
4. Boat Club
5 Summary.

1. Corrupt Games on trees.

a. Introduction.

I am writing in the evening of October 19, 2016.

I just completed a tour of the Magazine Beach destruction area run by the Mass. Department of Conservation and Recreation for the Cambridge Conservation Commission.

I have been faced with the usual corrupt games.

b. Lying through word games.

The most basic corrupt tactic is that the bad guys play games with words.  They define words to suit whatever lie they are putting out, and the redefinitions, somehow NEVER work against the goals of the bad guys.

I call that lying.

c. Repeated and routine changes.

First of all, the plans have changed to include outright admission of more destruction.  It took a pulling teeth exercise to get that out of them, but I got a copy of the modified plans.

It is a fool’s dilemma to treat these constant maneuvers as good faith.  I just consider the maneuvers as more lying, and the constantly shifting baseline is just another tactic to get the good guys to chase their tails to try to be fair.  With regard to  the people with whom we are dealing, fair play is a game, a weakness for the bad guys to take advantage of.

I will give the non stop games the respect they deserve, and the respect they deserve is flat out contempt.

I will live with the games so as to recognize them editorially, and I will to try to figure out reality in spite of the games.  I will not sucker into trying to recognize every “modification” or “definition” except in accordance with reality.

AT MINIMUM, 2 more trees are admitted as being destroyed.

d. An excellent tree may be destroyed because it is in “decline”.

First of all, another example of lying through definition.

The plans shown today show a lot of trees “declining.”  My understanding is there is a point where a tree is at its peak, comparable to middle age in humans.  Under the DCR’s definition of “decline,” there is a point of tree middle age which is the peak, perfection of treedom.

Under their secret definition, and translating the latest plans passed out, any tree which has reached peak maturity YESTERDAY, is now in decline.


In human terms, say you consider 45 to be peak maturity for a human being.  Under the DCR argument, once that person OR TREE passed peak middle age, 45, it is in decline and the DCR has a right to destroy it using that as an excuse.

Just more lying.

There are a lot of clearly excellent trees they claim to have a right to destroy because they are “in decline” , ONE DAY or more beyond that magic day of perfection, EVEN IF THEY ARE CLEARLY EXCELLENT TREES.

e. Bizarre SECRET definition of “trees”

On October 17, working from the plans I had on hand and the 200 or so photos I have taken, I reported an excellent trio of trees being destroyed in a location which is a the edge of the top of the hill / bath house area.  That trio of trees form an excellent backdrop for the playing fields.

That was reported at:

When I got the tour guide to that point, I pointed out that there are a lot more than three trees in that location.  There clearly are ten free standing trees there not three.

Another secret, dirty definition.

What happens is that the trees, to my view, have been planted close together so that they can be grown together, but they have not been grown together yet and the DCR intends to destroy them before they get a chance to grow together.

There are a number of excellent examples of this type of single large tree creation from multiple trees in the Newport mansion area.

These ten independent trees are shown on the DCR’s maps as three trees.  The latest map shows the three “trees” in decline.  So they call them three trees because they could be grown into and merged into three trees.  But they also call them in “decline”.

But it is ten trees the DCR is calling in “decline.” And they want to destroy about two thirds of them before they can merge.

So the ten separate trees will not be allowed to merge but nevertheless, the ten separate trees are called “three?”

And it would be silly to consider the merged tree as mature until the ten trees are merged into the merged tree.  So the three merged trees cannot possibly be in decline before merger occurs.  But the DCR lies that ten trees are three trees there and that the three trees are in decline.

Flat out lying.

f. Trees put in as part of the starvation wall will be redefined as “saved” trees.

They suddenly discovered that the INTRODUCED wall of bushes includes trees.  They want to keep the wall blocking to starve the Charles River White Geese, so they are recognizing introduced stuff that grew into trees, which they will now recognize as trees being saved.

2. Tiny opening in Starvation Wall.

The Starvation Wall has a tiny opening in it.

It has suddenly be defined as a kayuk ramp, the first time that term has ever been used.  The reality is that the opening corresponds to an opening the highway the DCR and Cambridge wanted to use to connect to the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.  IN THE CHARLES RIVER.

This clearly has proven to be more blatantly irresponsible than they can get away with.

So they now call it a kayuk ramp.

A fake pond was initially created which the Charles River White Geese loved and used to access their feeding area of most of the last 35 years.  Failure to starve the Charles River White Geese was unacceptable, so it was converted into an artificial wetlands, and a massive internal wall of introduced shrubs was added to REALLY prevent access.

The tiny opening is being expanded.  It is now officially a kayak ramp, and the DCR wants to force the public to pay to use any boats larger than a kayak.

So they are adding a permanent structure for observation, which would be more difficult to destroy later, and bragging that they are “allowing” kayaks.

3. Lawn to the river.

The DCR, or somebody, mentioned the requirements of the sanctified Charles River Master Plan.

I pointed out that the starvation wall is sitting in the middle of an area promised to be a LAWN TO THE RIVER.

They do not want a LAWN TO THE RIVER.  They do not want MEANINGFUL ACCESS TO THE RIVER.  That would prevent their deliberate starvation of the Charles River White Geese.

We got a whole bunch of confusion after that.

4. Boat Club

There is a boat club in the area which I have called the western area because it is on that portion of the destruction plans.  The Boat Club members use the parking lot behind the swimming pool.

I pointed out to one of the members that trees are being destroyed (and the number being destroyed is increasing) to move the parking lot.

The member was very insistent that the Boat Club owns the parking lot and that the DCR has no business destroying anything there.  He, furthermore, was very insistent there is no plan to do such a thing.

I pointed out that the DCR disagrees with him and was just showing off the level of destruction.

I anticipate the member was wrong, but this sort of situation helps the achievement of irresponsible behavior.  The bureaucrats keep things as secret as possible.  They satisfy the minimum, and that is it.  Meaningful communication might force the bureaucrats to be responsible.

To the bureaucrats, responsible behavior is not acceptable.

5 Summary.

I have tried to get this down as fast as possible.  It is now about an hour and a half since the end of the tour, and you have gotten my fresh recollection.

As I have gone through this, photos would have been excellent.  You have one link which will give key photos, and I expect I am going to have to get photos of that “three” trees which, in reality are ten.

This is part of the reason why the Legislature destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission.  The MDC was very destructive.  Their planners went to the DCR and are DESTROYING.

I will try to minimize my detailed response of the con games.

These people and their games deserve no respect.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Charles River: Destruction Threatened around Magazine Beach Swimming Pool.

Charles River:   Destruction Threatened around Magazine Beach Swimming Pool.

0. Supplement.
1. Introduction.
2. Destruction plans.
3. Doomed trees, swimming pool.
a. Views from across the street.
b. Views from the Magazine Beach area.
4. Summary.
5. Prior reports.
a. Accomplished Destruction.
b. This series, current threats.

0. Supplement.

These reports are issued in three formats.  This blog has the complete report.

Condensed reports are published on Facebook and in an email mailing.  Both include the URL for the complete report.

As I went to put out the condensed reports, I received a communication from the key woman who has been in the middle of the fight for massive destruction of the environment on the Charles River.

She and her friends pulled a Company Union fraud which could have been key in the destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive this year.

Now she is putting out the flat out lie. that the trees she is fighting to destroy at Magazine Beach NEED to be destroyed.

I have seen way too much of this sort of behavior under the Cambridge City Manager Machine which has been in power in Cambridge since 1974.  Honesty will not get the bad guys the terrible things they have fought for because Cambridge has an electorate which wants a responsible government.

So a well organized small minority indulges in corrupt tactics to achieve the goals of a bad city government / its friends in spite of the direct conflict with the clearly wished goals of so many Cambridge residents.  A tiny number of people can raise Hell with a bunch of well meaning people who do not understand but want to be fair.

It is my very strong hope that the City Manager select will clean up the mess which has dominated politics in the City of Cambridge in an increasingly effective manner starting in 1974.

1. Introduction.

This report is the latest in a series.  The series, with URL’s is presented in the last part of the report.

This report concentrates on destruction at the Magazine Beach swimming pool.

2. Destruction plans.

First of all, here is a satellite photo of this portion of Cambridge and the Charles River.  Magazine Beach IS the curve of the river.  Boston is below the river, Cambridge above.

Here is the index to the destruction plans.

To use these on our scanner, we have divided each page into two parts: right / left, west / east.

On the plan of plans, the western part of the destruction area leads, followed by the swimming pool area, followed by the hill / bath house area, followed by the playing fields.

This report concerns the swimming pool area, so here is the relevant part of that page.  The right hand side includes no trees, so I am not repeating it.

The vaguely rectangular building is the swimming pool.

The massive destruction on the hill is connected to the swimming pool on the right, so please review that report to place this destruction in context.  It is all one irresponsible package.  Document links in section 4 provides this information.

To place things in context, here is the destruction plan to the east of the swimming pool.

3. Doomed trees, swimming pool.

a. Views from across the street.

The most irresponsible destruction faces Memorial Drive.

Here is the view approaching the swimming pool.  This area was reported in the first hill destruction report.  However, the view from Memorial Drive was not provided.

Please compare this photo to the relevant photos and plan for the hill.

The big yellow tree is NOT BEING destroyed.  There are very few other trees in this photo which are also not being destroyed.

This is the same scorched earth destruction practiced by the DCR, Cambridge and their cheerleaders between the BU and Longfellow Bridges, where more destruction is yet to come.

Moving west.  A tree behind the yellow tree is being destroyed, then the next tree to the west is destroyed.

Then one tree is not destroyed.  Looking at the positioning on the plan, it looks like the small yellow tree is being destroyed, and there is another tree mostly hidden by the big yellow tree that is not being destroyed.

Moving west with the camera, the big yellow tree at the entrance dominates the photo. Then follows one tree with leaves and one leafless street trees which are not being destroyed.  After them is a yellow leaved tree which is being destroyed.

Moving west, the doomed yellow leaved tree is followed by another doomed street tree.  Both are dwarfed by a large tree behind them which is not being destroyed.

Moving further west, the doomed tree west of the yellow doomed tree can be seen more clearly.  This is a significant tree.

My guess is that these street trees are being destroyed to extend the gold plated bike highway which replaces the existing perfectly good bike highway, and which is the supposed cause of the destruction of so many of the hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridge.

The waste is so blatant, it is silly to consider these outrages as other than Make Work for Contractors.

Proceeding west, three out of four trees between the sidewalk and the parking lot are being destroyed.  This includes one extremely large tree, of the scale of the one which is not being destroyed and which overwhelms the street trees just shown.  There are two others of significant scale being destroyed and one tiny tree not being destroyed.  The tiny tree not being destroyed is probably on the right with the brown leaves.

The trees hidden by the tree behind the yellow tree look like the victims.

This looks like the two largest condemned trees with the little safe tree to their right.

b. Views from the Magazine Beach area.

Looking from the parking lot, I think the three trees on the left are the three doomed trees.  The nearest tree on the left is the one which previously could not be seen.

Here is a photo from the parking lot, looking past the yellow tree into the swimming pool.  Note the paving on either side of the yellow tree.  The yellow tree is doomed.

Looking at the lay of the parking lot, my guess is that the massive tree straight ahead but partially blocked right and left is doomed.

4. Summary.

Nothing has changed in the 16 years I have been following the vile behavior of Cambridge and the state bureaucracy on this part of the Charles River except that the destructive bureaucrats have been moved to a different department.

The legislature tried to protect the Charles River from a truly reprehensible bureaucracy which operates in lock step with a bad government in the City of Cambridge.  They destroyed the entity containing the bureaucracy, but transferred the irresponsible bureacrats, AND THEIR PLANS, to the DCR.

I have tried for years to avoid mentioning the fraudulent groups which grease the way for a bad government.  I have been forced to mention them.

The fake group through most of this has been the falsely named, and very destructive Charles River Conservancy.  They bragged about the misleading arguments by which they obtained the destruction money for the hundreds of trees destruction.  During the middle of this, dah dah, yet another fake protective group friendly to the City Manager’s people announced its creation and took over with the company union con game which is so popular with groups aligned with the City Manager’s people.

Now the latest fake group has gone public.  It is no longer just a con game.  Their latest leader has publicly supported the destruction of 42 trees in the area for which this fraudulent group has proclaimed love.

The destruction on both sides of the swimming pool is one big outrage.

The city council has replaced the retiring third City Manager of the Cambridge City Manager machine with a manager who is not the primary assistant to that third face in the Machine.  The City Manager position has been passed from City Manager to key assistant, an on.  The City Manager select has been strictly in the financial part of the city government.

That is an improvement, I hope.  We will have to watch the performance of the City Manager select, who has yet to take office.  So far the Acting City Manager is the assistant to the prior one.

5. Prior reports.

a.  Accomplished Destruction.

The Destruction of Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA, USA, January - February 2016, Final Cut:

b.  This series, current threats.

(1). 9/28/16, Government Agency Expanding Poison Usage on the Charles River, at
(2). 10/1/16, City Council Extends 42 Year City Manager Machine?  Note: includes links to Court Decisions / “non” Decision damning deliberate Civil Rights violations by the then Cambridge City Manager.  The "non" decision was the Appeals Court panel's denial of Cambridge's appeal.  They refused to dignify the appeal with a formal opinion, but it certainly looks like an opinion.
(3). 10/3/16, Charles River:  Cambridge Cheerleaders fight to Destroy 42 MORE Trees, at Magazine Beach.
(4). 10/6/16, Charles River, Magazine Beach Destruction Plans, Plea to Cambridge.  Includes extensive analysis of a corrupt governmental situation.
(5). 10/12/16, Charles River, First Magazine Beach Photos, Hill / Swimming Pool DESTRUCTION.  Provides photos of doomed trees on the hill west of the playing fields.
(6). 10/17/16, Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.
(7). 10/16/16, Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.  Excellent grove being destroyed which is on the hill, but towers over the playing fields.

Monday, October 17, 2016

Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.

Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.

I recently published a number of posts which reported major destruction proposed by the Mass. Department of Conservation and Recreation at Magazine Beach, particularly in the hill area.  Of 42 trees slated to be destroyed, 23 are in that area between the pedestrian overpass and the swimming pool building.

In my hill area report, I omitted a magnificent, dominant grave slated for destruction in this area.

Here, again, is the destruction plan for the hill area.

Note the three doomed trees together at the right about a third of the way from the bottom.

They look a lot better in person:

The trees to the right.

On the left in this photo.

On the right in this photo.  The bath house is visible to their left.

Proud and doomed by an entity the legislature tried to protect the Charles River from.  The Department of Conservation and Recreation is unfit to manage the environment.  It should be replaced by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  MassDOT has been the adult in the room on key matters with the DCR and Cambridge on the wrong side.

I have gone into much greater detail on the guilt of the City of Cambridge in my letter to the City Council and the incoming City Manager which I posted on this blog.

Now retired City Manager Rossi conducted a meeting last year at the main branch of the Public Library, in which he bragged of magnificent improvements coming on the Charles River.

I did not attend because the lies of omission have been so rampant.  Since his bragging, hundreds of trees have been destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges with more to come.

And now the DCR is bragging WITH LIES OF OMISSION of all its “improvements” to Magazine Beach.  The count, including this excellent grove is 42 trees to be destroyed in the Magazine Beach recreational area including 23 on the hill around the Bath House, including this grove.

The fake neighborhood association fought for the hundreds of destroyed trees by telling people to only look at the bath house area through standard Company Union tactics.  The fake group’s latest “leader” supported all proposed Magazine Beach tree destruction in front of the Cambridge Conservation Commission, including, WITHOUT EXCEPTION all of the destruction around her supposedly beloved bath house..

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Charles River, First Magazine Beach Photos, Hill / Swimming Pool DESTRUCTION

Charles River, First Magazine Beach Photos, Hill / Swimming Pool DESTRUCTION

1. Introduction.
2. Part of the COMING outrage in some photos.

1. Introduction.

I took approximately 200 photos of the threatened Magazine Beach recreation area over the past week.

I had intended to defer publication of the photos until I created a massive letter for transmittal to the Cambridge City Council.

I am afraid that the vileness, the hypocrisy of the enemy has just gotten to me.

The reality is that this is just one part of a long lasting fraud going on in the City of Cambridge by which a lot of destruction has been achieved in Cambridge by the City of Cambridge and its accomplices in which the way has been greased by fake protective groups which commonly have great affection for to the City of Cambridge, but neglect to mention that great affection for the City of Cambridge when they proclaim their “protective group” status.

The Company Union which claims to be defending the adjoining Cambridgeport neighborhood has spouted non stop lies about love for the Charles River and Magazine Beach.  The lies have centered for several years on one building, a bath house which has not been used for 80 years.

The pitch is stereotype company union fraud.  The Company Union loudly claims to be defending an excellent cause, and then, after establishing false credentials, fights against its stated cause by telling well intended people not to look at outrages it really is fighting for.

For at least four years or so, this fake group fought for the destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive using this fraud.  Translation “Look at Magazine Beach.  Look at the Bathhouse.  How dare you look at what we and our friends are destroying.”

The outrage by Cambridge and the DCR this Company Union fought for, and has heavily achieved,  is recorded at

2. Part of the COMING outrage in some photos.

The fraud has centered on supposed love for a 19th / 20th  Century Bathhouse which has not been used for 80 years.

The latest leader of this particular Company Union, at the Cambridge Conservation Commission hearing on September 26, PUBLICLY supported the destruction of 42 trees in the Magazine Beach recreation area including 23 trees which are part of the framing of her supposedly beloved bathhouse.

The following is just part of the destruction plans for the hill / bathhouse area.  These plans are PART OF MUCH LARGER DESTRUCTION PLANS SHE SUPPORTED. We have posted at the full destruction plans at

On the destruction plan, the bathhouse is the near rectangle slightly left of and below the center of the plan.  As you look toward the top of the plan (north), left (west) and middle, the doomed trees constitute almost every tree in their groupings.

Here is the supposedly beloved bathhouse.  Most of the trees you see stand out in the plans because they are not being destroyed.  MORE THAN A MAJORITY of the trees to the right (west) and behind the camera (north) are slated to be destroyed.  The tree to the far left, looking at the destruction plans, is doomed.  All destruction will be WITH THE SUPPORT OF THIS COMPANY UNION LEADER.

Here are some excellent photos of threatened trees in the area that she lies that she loves.

In this photo, the fence is the fence around the swimming pool.  All of the four large trees lining the fence are DOOMED along with the large tree further out between the two middle trees.  Additionally, the two trees at the far left beyond the fencing are doomed, but in the next page of the destruction plans (and not counted by me in the above number).

On the plan, I count 14 doomed trees in the area near the swimming pool building alone (including the doomed parking lot), and there are 5 doomed trees just east (right)t of those trees along Memorial Drive.

In this photo, the ONLY readily visible tree not to be destroyed is the one with yellowed leaves.

In this photo, there may be two nearby trees which are not doomed.

My guess is that the two nearest trees are being destroyed.

This tree is doomed.

In this photo, at minimum, the two largest trees are doomed.

I have run out of time.

This is the CORE area this woman and her Company Union have spent years lying that they love.

This is the sort of fraud I have been standing up to since the 42 year Cambridge City Manager Machine came into place.

Right now, I do not have the time to pick out the doomed, tree by tree.  I will come back to do so.

It is not at all difficult to compare the plans to the photos.

Thursday, October 06, 2016

Charles River, Magazine Beach Destruction Plans, Plea to Cambridge

Charles River, Magazine Beach Destruction Plans, Plea to Cambridge

On October 5, 2016, I hand carried the following letter to the Cambridge City Clerk for delivery to the Cambridge City Council at its next meeting.

I tried to do the same to the new City Manager.  Unfortunately he is not in office yet.  The door to the City Manager suite has a blank for the name of the City Manager.  Next to that name is the space for his top manager.  Her name is there, and the title is changed to Acting City Manager.

I understand that the vote to hire Louis A. DePasquale as City Manager which occurred last Thursday, September 29, 2016, needs further action by the City Council to get City Manager Select Louis A. DePasquale in office.  I guess I have to hold his copy until he takes office.

With regard to the attachments, if you would like to view my video on the destruction of hundreds of trees destroyed so far by Cambridge and the DCR, please check it out at

The destruction plans for Magazine Beach were posted at

In the last two days, I have taken considerable photos on the playing fields and the hill.  I still need to shoot the swimming pool area later.  I will match things up and commence with the photo accumulation which created the video.

Lies are the norm in the City of Cambridge on environmental matters.  It is very difficult for bad people, with any semblance of credibility, to deny what is on the Internet for the destruction so far.

* * * *

October 5, 2016

City Manager Louis A DePasquale
City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA   02139

City Council
City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA   02139

RE: Governmental Destruction on the Charles River

Gentlemen / Ladies:

I write individually and as Chair of Friends of the White Geese, a non profit organization recognized by the Attorney General since 2001.  Our main purpose is to protect the environment and the wildlife of the Charles River.  The principal threat is destructive government actions.

A bit over a year ago, City Manager Rossi bragged to a meeting in the Public Library that Cambridge was greatly improving the Charles River in the City of Cambridge.

There has been a pattern in which the things which are not communicated in environmental matters are too often more important than the things which are said.

Of relevance to the promises of “improvements” by City Manager Rossi are the following:

1. The enclosed video prepared by me on the Destruction of Memorial Drive, Charles River, City of Cambridge, January - February 2016 [ed: obvious typo, 2015, in original].  Cambridge / the Department of Conservation and Resources admit to destruction of 150 trees as part of this outrage.  The plans, as detailed in the video, call for destruction of 100 or so more additional trees because of destruction shown in the destruction plans of the thick woods between the Grand Junction and the BU Boathouse.

I would be pleased to provide individual copies of this video for members of the Cambridge City Council, although I anticipate that members would prefer to simply review my identical publication of the video at

2. The City Council’s extended discussions on a vehicular / pedestrian highway following the Grand Junction with what appears to be a terminal route in the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese and associated animal abuse and environmental destruction.  The City Council has accumulated a large file on this matter, keeping the Charles River impact as secret as possible.

3. The enclosed destruction plans presented by the DCR to the Cambridge Conservation Commission on September 26, 2016.  I count destruction of an additional 42 trees, including

a. destruction of 9 trees at the playing fields,
b. destruction of 23 trees at the top of the hill west of the playing fields,
c. destruction of 9 trees in the swimming pool area, and
d. destruction of 1 tree in the western portion.

The destruction at the playing fields by itself would be outrageous.  It is dwarfed by plans at the top of the hill and by the outrage already accomplished and planned between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow bridge.  The hill plans include destruction of publicly usable parking.

I kept in contact with the City Council starting in September 2015 with emails three or more times a week.  The emails included photographs showing trees Cambridge and the DCR were threatening east of the BU Bridge.  That email communication package was extended to non incumbents in about October, and was extended to reports of destruction in January and February.

The City Council took action in January 2016 in the middle of the massive logging reported in the video.  The City Council, in January, chastised and regulated circuses passing through the City of Cambridge for animal abuse.  Whether this action was intended to be a response to the tree destruction, associated heartless animal abuse and related outrages by the DCR and Cambridge on the Charles River is difficult to ascertain.

City Manager Rossi has retired.  City Manager DePasquale was only, to my knowledge, involved in financial matters.

In the 2000s, Mr. Rossi managed the first phase of destruction at Magazine Beach destruction.  That resulted from a vote by the Cambridge City Council in December 1999.  That vote, in turn, was preceded by the promise of City Manager Healy that Cambridge’s money would be seed money for much larger destruction.

Mr. Rossi also managed the destruction of 3.4 acres or more at Alewife, and, I believe, the destruction on the Cambridge Common as well by which the excellent grove at the Harvard Square entrance was destroyed.


The destruction of the 2000s had two key aspects which were created by flat out lies or lies of omission.

The Starvation Wall

Flat out lies created the failed 16 foot high wall of introduced vegetation which blocks access between the Charles River and Magazine Beach.

The DCR promised a lawn to the river, but fine print in their goals includes an outrageous goal to kill or drive away all resident animals on the Charles River.  The bizarre wall’s principal purpose is to starve the 35 year resident, and tourist attraction,  the Charles River White Geese.

A side effect of the maneuvers to kill this popular tourist attraction was the effective closing of the Charles River for almost all private boat access.

Users of the playing fields keep away from the Charles River area because this bizarre wall is offensive.  Users are kept from the Charles River and are offended by what is in place.

The DCR wants to keep this outrage with slight lowering in parts and in another part replacement by a permanent obstacle.  They brag that kayaks can get through their obstacle course, and lie through omission that they are blocking anything bigger.  They want to CHARGE people, further down the river, to use boats which the DCR and Cambride are preventing private parties from bringing to the river.

The bizarre bridge from the parking lot should be replaced with a functional access to the Charles for boat users.  The bizarre wall should be replaced with WHAT THE DCR PROMISED IN THE FIRST PLACE: a Lawn to the River.  The bizarre internal mass of vegetation which further blocks access should be removed.  Boat owners should once again be allowed to use the formerly public dock at the end of the parking lot.  

Charging people for a use that was formerly free and which can readily be returned is yet another outrageous act.

Use of Poisons.

Magazine Beach survived for the better part of a Century with responsible, non poison, grass maintenance.  In the 2000s, the DCR did the unthinkable.  They introduced use of poisons for fertilizer.

This has also been a blatant failure, witness the playing fields.

So the DCR wants to multiply the use of poisons, putting in more poison drinking grass in the playing fields, and introducing use of poisons at the hill and behind the swimming pool.

During the Conservation Commission meeting, the DCR announced it planned to hire contractors to drain off new poisons behind the swimming pool, poisons which should not be used on the banks of the Charles River in the first place.  To be exact, the purpose of the drainage system was kept secret and the irresponsible people did not reply to my clearly accurate interpretation.


These latter outrages on their own, WITHOUT THE DCR’S LOVE FOR MASSIVE DESTRUCTION OF TREES prove the DCR unfit to manage Cambridge’s valuable open space.

Part of the agreement by which the City Council spent millions on the destruction of the 2000s at the playing fields was an agreement by which the DCR and Cambridge agreed that Cambridge would receive control of management of Magazine Beach.  The chief destroyer on the DCR management team has since reaffirmed the intention of the DCR to transfer management to the City of Cambridge whenever the City of Cambridge deemed it appropriate to visibly take responsibility for management of Magazine Beach.

Remember, Mr. Rossi publicly bragged of “improvements” on the Charles River.  Remember, Healy, in December 1999, sold the City Council on phase 1 of the Charles River outrages as “seed money” for what we are seeing now.  And the current City Council was deafeningly silent during the beginning of the current outrages in spite of multiple reports by me WITH PHOTOGRAPHS leading up to and during massive destruction.

The DCR and Cambridge accomplished the destruction described in the video years after approvals expired.  The DCR, claiming legislative fiat, refused to discuss the destruction, and the City Council, except for its admonishing transient circuses was deafeningly silent in response to my repeated emails.

I think a minimal response to the outrages which have started and which are multiplying is to obtain legislative approval to transfer all duties, responsibilities and funding of the DCR on the Charles River to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation without planners and / or managers.  

MassDOT is not perfect, but the DCR is a lot closer to being perfect in the wrong direction.  MassDOT has performed as the adult in the room on key matters.

Transfer without planners and / or managers is appropriate because the legislature destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission to protect public lands from the MDC.  The MDC planners and managers transferred to DCR and went ahead with MDC plans YEARS AFTER APPROVALS DIED.

Failing or perhaps in addition to transfer of responsibilities to MassDOT, it would seem reasonable of the City of Cambridge to assume the rights in the agreement associated with the 2000s destruction, assuming management of Magazine Beach.  

Cambridge should end the destruction which the DCR threatens in the attached plans, and end the secret outrages which would disqualify the DCR for management responsibilities on their own.  

These actions would be consistent with the constant claims of the City and City Council to environmental leadership.  Those claims of environmental leadership are placed in question by the behavior allowed to and shared with the DCR.


Robert J. La Trémouille, Individually, 
and as Chair, Friends of the White Geese

Monday, October 03, 2016

Charles River: Cambridge Cheerleaders fight to Destroy 42 MORE Trees, at Magazine Beach

Charles River:  Cambridge Cheerleaders fight to Destroy 42 MORE Trees, at Magazine Beach

1. Introduction.
2. General Map, showing location of subdivisions.
3. Western Portion,
4. Swimming pool area.
5. Hill area.
6. Playing fields.
7. Summary.
8.  Post Script.
9.  Post Post Script, October 4, 2016.

1. Introduction.

On September 27, 2016, at, I reported the plans of the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, the City of Cambridge and their Cheerleaders to further destroy the Magazine Beach recreation area on the Charles River west of the BU Bridge.

The woman who personifies the fight for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge is now head of the Cheerleading group which calls itself a “Neighborhood Association” and which has spent years yelling about their love for the Charles River and Magazine Beach.

She now is the president of this fake group.  She represented it at the meeting of the Cambridge Conservation Commission at which the DCR presented its plans for this latest outrage.

This woman blessed the planned destruction by the DCR and Cambridge at the meeting, apparently claiming to represent her fake group.

I have looked at the plans more closely.  To be exact, I counted out the trees being destroyed by these three entities live on my Cable show on Cambridge Cable Channel 9 at 6:30 pm on October 2.  I did the count showing the plans live on camera from this blog.  I was so shocked by the count that I ran overtime.  I kept on going after my show had been automatically ended by the station computer.  I did not realize that I was no longer live.

Here, once again, are the key destruction plans.  This time I am including my count of tree destruction (O with X on top of it).  I will start with their summary map.  My original publication of these plans show area photos by satellite and regular plans, and I intend to present photos of the doomed trees.  I already have done many.

In all of these plans, the Charles River is directly below and touching the area shown in the plan.

Please feel free to double click on each map to blow them up for detailed review.  Comments to me at would be appreciated.

2. General Map, showing location of subdivisions.

3.  Western Portion,

1 tree to be destroyed.

Please note the fuzzy markings on a number of apparently not destroyed trees.  Input as to the meaning of these markings would be appreciated.

4.  Swimming pool area.

9 trees to be destroyed.

5.   Hill area.

22 trees to be destroyed in the main part of the plan, 1 tree in the part I could not get on that photo.  For a total of 23 trees being destroyed.

This is the area where the lies are the thickest.  The Cheerleaders have told people to look at this area and NOT TO LOOK at so many terrible things they have fought for and the destruction which they have achieved between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.  THE CHEERLEADERS, Cambridge and the DCR are working to destroy 23 trees in this area.

6.   Playing fields.

Not much left to destroy as far as trees go.

I will go into the starvation wall in subsequent reports. That and the poison usage are the Heartless Animal Abuse.

5 trees destroyed in the first part of the plan, 4 trees to be destroyed in the Eastern / right hand part of the plan, for a total of 9.

I count 1 tree in the western portion, 9 trees in the swimming pool area, 23 trees at the top of the hill, THE BIGGEST BRAGGING PORTION FROM THE CHEERLEADERS, and 9 at the playing fields.

I add this up to 42 trees in A RELATIVELY SMALL AREA compared to the perhaps miles between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.

7. Summary.

This destruction is IN ADDITION TO more than 150 trees Cambridge and the DCR admit to destroying between the BU and Longfellow Bridges, PLUS 100 to 200 in the thick woods between the BU Boathouse and the Grand Junction Railroad, PLUS 1 magnificent tree admitted in the Destroyed Nesting Area, and PLUS WHO KNOW HOW MANY in the fine print of the City Council’s Grand Junction plan.

And the Cheerleaders who call themselves by lovely titles fought for this destruction with Company Union tactics for years before going public with their fight for massive tree destruction in 2015.

The scary thing about this situation is that I have not even got into their heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese, and it may be several reports before I get into that.

The terrible things done by Cambridge and the DCR is bad enough.  The use of these city influenced fake groups to defraud well meaning people into complacency is even more outrageous.

8.  Post Script.

In addition to the record and tactics I reported in my report on the selection of the next City Manager,, the just retired City Manager Rossi publicly bragged about “improvements” coming on the Charles River during one or more public appearances in 2015.

There is a tradition of lying through omission in Cambridge City Government’s City Manager Machine.  The really bad stuff is kept secret.  This is how they get very terrible things done in a city which wants responsible government.

Clearly the “improvements” Rossi was bragging about, in the standard lies of omission by the Government of the City of Cambridge, are the hundreds of trees destroyed AND TO BE DESTROYED between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and the 42 trees shown in these plans slate TO BE DESTROYED at Magazine Beach.

With, of course, the usual fake protective group smoothing the way, lying that they are “protecting” the world, and praising, non stop the City of Cambridge and the DCR, along with CENSORING honest ACCURATE evaluations of the City of Cambridge and the DCR.

9. Post Post Script, October 4, 2016.

The real horror of the situation, rereading this report, is that I have gotten immune to these outrages.  The destruction at the playing fields alone is outrageous.  The destruction on the hill dwarfs it.

Cambridge residents have gotten immune to the ongoing fraud of all these Cheerleaders, running about lying, not just this very terrible group.

Absolutely horrible behavior has become the norm in this reprehensible (to quote the Monteiro trial judge) situation.

Saturday, October 01, 2016

Cambridge, MA, Extends Destructive 42 Year City Manager Machine?

Cambridge, MA, Extends Destructive 42 Year City Manager Machine?

1. General.
2. Selection of Louis A. DePasquale.
3. A key “Defect” of Robert “Jay” Ash, Jr.
4. Factors in the Environmental Outrage which is the Government of the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.
A. Appointments.
B. Fake “Protective” Groups.
C. “Green Ribbon Committee” Report on Open Space.
5. The Deal on Magazine Beach, December 1999.
6. Possible hope in City Manager designate DePasquale.
7. Defects in the others from the Point of View of a Bad City Council.
8. Summary.
9. Suggested Sources.

1. General.

A copy of this report is being provided to the Cambridge City Manager designate with hopes that he will be consistent with his promises and will not be consistent on environmental issues with the record of the three City Managers he is succeeding.

According to Cambridge Day, the day before last night’s City Manager vote by the Cambridge City Council, Robert “Jay” Ash, Jr., the Secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts with 14 years experience as City Manager of nearby Chelsea, MA, and other experience in Chelsea and the state house withdrew his candidacy for City Manager of the City of Cambridge.  Good write up at

2. Selection of Louis A. DePasquale.

Last night, September 29, 2016, the Cambridge City Council unanimously elected Louis A. DePasquale City Manager, with at most three city councilors communicating that they possibly might have chosen another candidate on the first round of votes.

DePasquale, in sharp contrast to the other two finalists, does not have top level experience as a general level City Manager subtype.  That lack of top level experience may be the best hope for the environment in the City of Cambridge.

One Councilor commented that email and other communications received were something like two thirds in favor of Ash.  Cambridge Day reports that Fetherston got the highest evaluation team grade.

3. A key “Defect” of Robert “Jay” Ash, Jr.

Ash, in retrospect and in listening to City Councilors, had a key “defect” which I consider exactly the opposite of a defect.  Ash spoke of the small parks he created around Chelsea.

4. Factors in the Environmental Outrage which is the Government of the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.

There are three factors key to the environmental outrage which is the City of Cambridge, Massachusetts.

A. Appointments.

Over the years, the Cambridge City Manager Machine developed a corporate memory of appointees, a memory which probably will be passed on to Mr. DePasquale, especially from the Development Department.

The City government learned, by appointments of new people to a MINORITY of seats on boards, who could be controlled and who could not.  In my observation the new appointments always have been a minority on a particular board.  This created a situation that untried members could not sway a board which the City Manager wanted to be controlled.  If an appointee could be controlled, that appointee stood a chance of further appointment to office.  If an appointee could not be controlled, don’t be silly about future good appointments.

A major factor demonstrating the control demanded of the appointees was the City Manager’s destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro, a black, Cape Verdean female department head.  Monteiro had the nerve to file a civil rights complaint alleging disparate treatment of women, and its impact on her.

That City Manager was condemned by three level of Court for his “reprehensible” behavior in destroying her life in retaliation.

The City Council spent millions and more than a decade defending that City Manager outrage.  The “reprehensible” quote is from the Trial Judge’s opinion.  The jury awarded more than triple PENAL damages in addition to its more than  a million dollars actual damage determination.  The Appeals Court refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion.

The Cambridge City Council named the Cambridge Police Station after the City Manager with the “reprehensible” behavior.

Links to the judicial opinions are at the end of this report.

B. Fake “Protective” Groups.

In 1974, the newly hired City Manager (actually returned, he was fired in the 60s) stated he wanted to create a system of “neighborhood associations.”  “Protective” groups have suddenly announced their existence very often when there is a city associated fight for destructive behavior.  These “protective” groups all sound great, constantly praising the government City of Cambridge.  And they, pretty much without exception, have members who are friendly with members of other such groups.

The “protective” group which currently most visibly fights for destruction on the Charles River openly brags that it has a DUTY to censor ALL comments on its Listserv if those comments are negative to the City of Cambridge or Cambridge’s governmental friends, no matter how true the allegation might be or how damaging censorship is to the supposed cause of the group.  But the destructive “protective” group  insists that it, in the bizarre world which is Cambridge, MA, is a “neighborhood association” and that it is “defending” the Charles River.

Since its TIMELY creation of this entity, its behavior has had multiple instances highly consistent with that of a Company Union.  One excellent example is the very belligerent lack of ethics creating the “vote” on which its claim rests that it has “neighborhood” support in its fight for destruction on Magazine Beach.

This “protective”group went public with its fight for destruction of those hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive at the end of 2015 after three or four years fighting for the destruction in the established company union manner, by lying of “concern” and suppressing discussion of the destruction its friends were working for.  The company union fraud persists.

C. “Green Ribbon Committee” Report on Open Space.

The “Green Ribbon Committee” was appointed in 1999 and came out with a report in 2000.  At least one member of the “committee” communicated very real pressure applied by Development Department staff of the committee to rubber stamp the demands of the Development Department.

It is silly to consider this “report” other than dictated by the City Manager through his employees.

The “Green Ribbon Committee” report, as communicated to the public, supported new open space in development areas, with “new” open space elsewhere by turning existing open space into “new” open space without adding to the square footage of the open space.

The inventory of city open space shown in the entity’s map included open space controlled by the Department of Conservation and Recreation (under a different name then).  The Development Department worked closely with the DCR and blessed the outrages planned and achieved by that vile department.

After the legislature destroyed the predecessor to the DCR because of its destructiveness, the “planners” and “managers” simply changed titles, at most, in the new entity, the DCR.  Somehow, approvals received by the predecessor were allowed by the legislature to go forward years after the approvals would have been required to be newly obtained because they were so old and outdated.

So existing open space on the Charles River was massively and ruthlessly destroyed, including hundreds of trees, to create “new” open space for the benefit of contractors and pretty much nobody else, except for the benefit of a city government which protected a maximum amount of property for the tax rolls.

Key in this nuttiness is a governing principal which was reaffirmed by the City Council very strongly on September 29: the tax rate is everything.

Creation of parks throughout the city for municipal benefit, which Mr. Ash bragged about, is anathema to Cambridge pols.


In Cambridge, almost entirely, new parks benefit development, as was specifically called for by the “Green Ribbon Committee” report as communicated by the City Manager’s people.

Creating “new” open space by destroying perfectly good existing open space is obviously why the Cambridge City Council funded and destroyed the excellent grove at the entrance to the Cambridge Common.

Creating “new” open space by destroying existing open space is obviously why the Cambridge City Council funded and destroyed 3.4 or more acres of virgin and irreplaceable woodlands in the Alewife woodlands.

This destruction came at the same time as the City Council yelling at NEARBY private developers obeying MUNICIPALLY CREATED ZONING in other parts of the same irreplaceable woodlands.

Reality in Cambridge is blatant lies of omission, blatant hypocrisy, and all those friendly “protective” groups which can be relied on to turn a blind eye to reality, including the most recent, the most destructive such group, which brags of a DUTY to censor.

Creating “new” open space by destroying existing open space is the reason obviously why the Cambridge City Council funded millions of dollars for destruction of Magazine Beach in the 2000s.  This has now been expanded by the DCR with Cambridge support into destruction of hundreds of trees to the east of Magazine Beach, and the DCR along with Cambridge Cheerleaders is working to make Magazine Beach even worse.

Creating “new” open space by destroying existing open space is the reason why NINE City Councilors yelled at Circuses passing through town instead of yelling at the DCR and the City Manager when those hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive were being destroyed.  The City Council was deafeningly silent during the months of 3 times a week reports with photos sent to them by me before and during destruction.  The City Councilor was added to the mailing list for the condensed version of these blog reports.  The then non incumbent who was elected missed perhaps the first month.  She got the rest.

5. The Deal on Magazine Beach, December 1999.

There were two important parts of the deal by which the Cambridge City Council provided millions toward first stage destruction (2000s) at Magazine Beach:

The most visible part was that it provided SEED MONEY FOR FURTHER DESTRUCTION (accurate descriptive word never used).  The SEED MONEY concept was clearly stated, with euphemisms, as part of the deal, and the Development Department clearly was involved in the planning for subsequent destruction.  The now departing City Manager personally managed the 2000s destruction.  With the destruction of these hundreds of trees, we just got a major part of what the City Council bought.  Additional destruction is coming at Magazine Beach.

A part of the deal for millions of Cambridge dollars for destruction at Magazine Beach which has been studiously ignored by Cambridge was an agreement that Cambridge would then control the use of Magazine Beach.  That part of the deal has been reaffirmed by the most irresponsible, but visible  member of the DCR’s team.

The deal for Cambridge control of Magazine Beach has never been exercised by Cambridge for a key reason.

The Cambridge City Council lies that it is pro environment.  The control of Magazine Beach would remove a key and very blatant part of their lies, that they have nothing to do with Charles River destruction.

6. Possible hope in City Manager designate DePasquale.

The strongest REAL hope for the environment is DePasquale’s lack of general city management experience.  He has not been part of the central rottenness which his predecessors created.  He has been part of FINANCE, FINANCE, FINANCE which is all that really drives Cambridge.

DePasquale’s pitch during his public questioning was that of openness to ideas other than finance, finance, finance, coming from the public.

There is hope there.

7. Defects in the others from the Point of View of a Bad City Council.

Cambridge, with the DePasquale appointment, does not get a City Manager with the record of creating open space IN SPITE OF PROPERTY COMING OFF THE TAX ROLES, as Mr. Ash has done in the past.

Cambridge does not have a City Manager who would require nine City Councilors to share the blame for terrible decisions, as translates the strong point repeatedly pitched by Mr. Featherston, worded bluntly from our perspective.  Fetherston gave his pitch in a very positive manner, not realizing the House of Cards which is destruction of the environment in Cambridge.

Years of observation lead to my conclusion that the Cambridge City Council does not want to share responsibility for terrible decisions.  They look like they like being lied to through lies of omission and BURIED fine print.  The City Councillors clearly want to lie that they are environmentally responsible in spite of reality.

The House of Cards on which the lies of environmental responsibility in Cambridge are based is the big danger to destructive City Councilors.

8. Summary.

Can a financial expert appointed City Manager who says he wants to be responsible to the public tumble the House of Cards?  There is a much longer chance of that happening than the chance which would have come from appointing either of the other candidates.  We will see.

In the meantime, Cambridge has a vile record and a vile state agency with which it is in bed.

9. Suggested Sources.

My video summarizing the latest outrage and giving only a tiny glimpse at the next one may be viewed at

The plans for the coming destruction at Magazine Beach are reported at

Trial judge opinion in Monteiro, “Reprehensible”:

Appeals Court non opinion opinion, Evidence of “outrageous conduct”:

I have been looking at a lot more of Cambridge Day than I have in the past, and I have very strong differences on their policy attitudes.  However, their editorial / evaluation on the selection process is excellent.  It can be read at:

The editor’s negative reference in this article to the City Council “admitting no mistakes” is astute.  It is a much nicer, and less pointed, way to put my condemnation of the behavior of the Cambridge City Council as claiming sainthood.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Govt Agency Expanding Poison Usage on the Charles River

Govt Agency Expanding Poison Usage on the Charles River

The Department of Conservation and Recreation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had a preliminary hearing on its latest destruction plans for Memorial Drive on the Charles River in Cambridge, MA, USA.  The hearing was September 26, 2016 before the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  It concerned yet another outrage at Magazine Beach between the Charles River and Memorial Drive.

I received a copy of the proposal from the CCC, and have published the destruction maps on the Charles River White Geese Blog at

The DCR team very visibly included that staffer who has been the most destructive force on the Charles River for the past more than a decade and a half.

Under direct questioning, he and his team did not bothering denying that the project includes yet more use of poisons on the Charles River, in spite of the fact that the poison drinking grass they introduced in the 2000s has been a failure.

The question spun off yet another Make Work for Contractor project. The DCR wants to dump more of their beloved poisons on Magazine Beach after destroying responsible grass which has survived the better part of a Century. The poisons would be dumped on introduced poison drinking grass.  In turn, the Contractors would be paid to build fancy systems to drain away poisons the DCR should not be using in the first place.

Poison use introduced in the 2000s was at the Magazine Beach playing fields.  Expansion will be to the top of the hill west of the playing fields and behind the swimming pool further west.

The plans show more, significant tree destruction. The DCR loves poison use and loves tree destruction. Doomed trees are indicated on the destruction plans by an O with an X on top of it.

The DCR should be replaced on the Charles River by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, without transferring planners or managers to MassDOT.

I am still reviewing the publication.

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Charles River: Latest Magazine Beach Destruction Plans Published

Charles River: Latest Magazine Beach Destruction Plans Published

1. Introductory.
2. Overview.
3. Here are the plans.

1. Introductory.

Last night, September 26, 2016, the Cambridge Conservation Commission had a preliminary meeting with the Department of Conservation and Recreation on the DCR’s latest plans for destruction on Magazine Beach.

The CCC provided us with a copy of the plans, and I am passing the key plans on to you.

2. Overview.

In order to better understand what we are dealing with, here are three overviews of the Magazine Beach area.

The first is a map published by the City of Cambridge in 2010.  Running from the narrowness at the far left, first you have the western end.  Then (see the green rectangle) you have the swimming pool area.  Then you have the hill area between the Swimming Pool and the playing fields.  The connected lines are paths in the hill area.  The open area is the playing fields, followed by their parking lot and then the state's sewerage treatment plant, most of which is covered with grass.  The line open area at the far right is the BU Bridge.  The crescent shape above it are ramps to and from Memorial Drive.  The green area to the far right is the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.  At the bottom is the Charles River.  At the top are buildings in the built up part of Cambridge, the Cambridgeport neighborhood.

I have spent a lot of time discussing the future home of the Harvard Medical School on the south side of the Charles.  Here is a portion of a map of the plans there imprinted on a satellite photo.  In this photo, Magazine Beach runs diagonally from lower left (west / left above) to the sewerage treatment plant at the upper right, with the Charles, again, below.

The orange line at the bottom right is the border of the highway (Mass. Pike, I-90) study area which includes the Harvard Medical School.

Here is the corresponding satellite photo from the destruction plans.

3. Here are the plans.

The DCR has broken the destruction area into four parts, the Western Area, the Swimming Pool Area, the hill between the Swimming Pool and the Playing Fields, and the Playing Fields.  These run from west to east.  The playing fields are nearest the BU Bridge and the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

The playing fields were the principal home and feeding grounds of the Charles River White Geese for most of the last 35 years until the Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge walled them off from the Charles River to starve the Charles River White Geese.

Here is a source map from the destruction plans showing the division of the area into the four parts.

Because of limitations on my scanner, I have divided each part of the plan in half, west and then east or left and right.  The earlier / western two plans did not cover as much area as the later two, eastern plans, so the two halves the first two parts show the diagram of the respective area, and then notes.  The bottom part of the note page shows a diagram of the combined 4 parts indicating which of the 4 parts of the destruction plans this particular one is.

In each instance, trees slated for destruction are marked with a 0 with an X over it.

The latter two plans were too wide to put each on one page so there is a division with an area duplicated in the middle.

Western End

Swimming Pool Area

Hill, between Swimming Pool and Playing Fields

Playing Fields