Thursday, December 08, 2016

Charles River Walk by a friend: Historical Observations

Charles River Walk by a friend: Historical Observations

1. Historical Observations by a Friend.
2. Editor’s Comment.


1. Historical Observations by a Friend.

Phil Barber follows up on his report of a few days ago with the following:

* * * *

I also found little traces of history in the soil disturbed by the work along the river. It was my ambition many years ago to work in archaeology, which I studied at college way back when. So I am very much drawn to any and all freshly turned earth as well as the study of history. The workers struck a shell midden; there’s an area where many fragmented oyster shells are scattered on the surface. Oysters were an enormous popular food in colonial and 19th century times but because there are no worked artifacts among the shells I saw, their origin is almost certainly pre-European. The native people summered in this area, harvesting the abundant shellfish and waterfowl, retreating to the sheltered highlands further inland during the winter. It’s easy to forget they lived here in harmony with the ecosystem for upwards of eighty centuries. The river was immensely wider too, from (more or less) where Brookline Street is now, all the way to Washington Street in Boston’s South End. (I grew up not far from Dover Street there, which was the narrow neck of land by which the peninsula of Boston was attached to the mainland before all the landfills.)

I also found late nineteenth century landfill along the river. This is first spotted by the abundance of coal ash, and on closer inspection you'll see broken glassware and crockery and the odd bit of organic material if it is from below the water table. The original plan for the filled in area of our city was like Boston’s Back Bay, but the economic collapse of 1893 ended that project, just as the fall-off in trade in the War of 1812 sabotaged the original Cambridge port scheme.

I notice a lot of local street signs commemorating events of that war, which was very much like our more recent imperial wars, and one that most people don’t realize the U.S. lost. New southern and western Congressmen, called the "War Hawks," carried the midterm election of 1810 by campaigning for the use of federal military power to drive Indians off the land their constituents desired for expansion of their slave labor plantations. They also sought to conquer and annex British Canada, Spanish Florida, and Mexican Texas. The navy scored some unprecedented successes against the Royal navy but the ground war was a fiasco. The failure of American arms was reflected in the Treaty of Ghent that ended the war. It addressed none of the grievances that had allegedly caused America to declare war. Britain, weary of her two decade-long war with France, agreed only to restore the pre-war status quo, and promised to abandon her Indian allies in return for a U.S. agreement never to invade Canada again. The real losers were Native Americans, who lost their most powerful international ally and from 1815 onward would fight on alone in a doomed bid for survival on the land they had cared for so long.

Phil

2. Editor’s Comment.

On the Charles River, the best friend of the Charles River White Geese back in 1999 to 2000 when I started to get really involved was Native American, LittleBrook, who, for a number of years, had been providing them with nourishment supplemental to the environmentally responsible grass which was their primary food source.  The responsibly maintained grass had been there for the better part of a Century, until it was destroyed for poison drinking grasses by Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation in the 2000s.

LittleBrook treated the ills of the Charles River White Geese with Native American remedies.

LittleBrook was with the Charles River White Geese pretty much whenever I visited, until he got a bicycle to commute from his home in the Allston neighborhood of Boston.

Two days after LittleBrook got the bicycle, he was hit by a car.  Last I spoke with him, he had been out of formal hospital / nursing home care for years, but he was not strong enough to return to his beloved friends.

Here are photos from the last time I saw Little Brook at the Destroyed Nesting Area, with his beloved friends during a session in which I showed around representatives of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation:



I invited him, and he brought munchies.

Friday, December 02, 2016

Charles River: A Knowledgeable Visit.

Charles River: A Knowledgeable Visit.

1. Phil Barber sees and reports:
2. Analysis.
3. Documentation of Part of the Record.


1. Phil Barber sees and reports:

I took a walk along the river this afternoon where they’re “improved” things. Looking at the new trees I wondered if any would survive – and if they do, will there still be the likes of a dcr to try to cut them down when they reach maturity. Then it occurred to me that there may not be automobiles or Memorial Drive when those young oaks reach their peak; maybe the whole area will be a tidal marsh again.

There were unusual visitors today on the river, a pair of swans and their two young. I see swans often at Watertown and sometimes in Boston harbor but not so often down here. Here’s a pretty good photo of two of them



2. Analysis.

As usual, Phil is very astute.

Since the outrageous destruction, WITH MORE PLANNED, saplings have been planted.

Most of the saplings, in fact almost all of them, are in locations which should have been planted a decade ago.  To the extent some saplings have been planted in the areas of greatest outrage, the “replacement” is a horror show and nothing less.

I have not examined the plantings close enough to be certain exactly where they were planted.  What is clear is that the plantings are far inferior to what was destroyed.  If they were provided as "replacements," they only benefit the Contractors, Make Work for Contractors when destroyed.  Make Work for Contractors when replaced.

Phil’s comment about how long will the saplings last before THEY are destroyed is exactly on point.  The hypocrites from Cambridge and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation brag about numbers.  They neglect to mention that a very clear part of the plan is to yell “TOO THICK” a few years out.

So the Make Work for Contractors has built in Make Work for Contractors in the out years.

At the same time, his reference to Global Warming is exactly on point.  The outrage on the Charles River is just part of the interlocking destruction of our world by mankind.  The big difference is the level of hypocrisy which is practiced in the key community, Cambridge, with its fake protective groups piously and hypocritically praising their destructive bureaucratic friends.

Correction of the irresponsible behavior should be two fold.

Hopefully, the Cambridge City Council has taken the first step.  The Cambridge City Council has hired a new Cambridge City Manager who does not look like part of the 42 year long Cambridge City Manager Machine outrage.  The new City Manager looks like a normal human being, in sharp contrast to his three inbred predecessors.

Next, the DCR must go.  The legislature tried to protect the Charles River and other sensitive locations from the reprehensible Metropolitan District Commission.  The legislature did part of the job.  The bridges went to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  The trouble is that the shores went to the DCR.  The destructive “planners” from the MDC moved to the DCR with their irresponsible plans and even exempted their irresponsible plans from normal reviews through another underhanded maneuver.

Dumping the DCR in favor of MassDOT will be a team effort that includes the legislature and the governor.

MassDOT is not perfect, but the DCR and the Cambridge City Manager Machine have approached being perfect in the wrong direction.

In this part of the Charles River, MassDOT has looked like the adult in the room with the DCR and the Cambridge City Manager Machine on either side as destructive brats.

But, thank you Phil.  Hopefully, the next outrage can be prevented, and hopefully we will get rid of the other part of the destructive bureaucrats who do so much harm to the Charles River, and do so much harm as part of mankind’s destruction of our world.

3. Documentation of Part of the Record.

My video of the outrageous destruction this time, with only a hint of what is scheduled to come next, is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

Monday, November 28, 2016

Charles River, Magazine Beach: SECRET Destruction Plan Discovered.

Charles River, Magazine Beach: SECRET Destruction Plan Discovered.

I was in the process of preparing a formal letter to the new Cambridge City Manager and the Cambridge City Council, describing that portion of the proposed outrage on Magazine Beach which surrounds the Magazine Beach Swimming Pool.

I have been working from the formal plans submitted to the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  I knew, however, from the walk through that the Department of Conservation and Recreation had increased, allowing for fraud, the planned destruction to 54 from the previously announced 42.

At the walk through which the DCR conducted of its project, the DCR announced new and fancier plans.  I asked for a copy.  They did not want to provide me the new plans in hard copy, but the CCC prevailed.

It turns out that, WITHOUT MEANINGFULLY COMMUNICATING IT, the new plans include destruction of trees OUTSIDE THE ANNOUNCED DESTRUCTION AREA.  I call that Lying Through Omission.  Lying Through Omission was a standard tactic of the three past Cambridge City Managers when keeping secret environmental destruction.  The DCR does not, in my experience, live up to the level of the Cambridge City Manager Machine.

The new destruction is of trees which do not even show on the original plans as in the destruction area.

Here is the relevant part of the ORIGINALLY announced plan of the Swimming Pool area destruction.



Here is the relevant part of the new destruction announcement.



The secret destruction is ACROSS MEMORIAL DRIVE from the Swimming Pool.  You will note that on the original plan, you see a large, almost rectangle in the middle of the slide.  That is the support building for the swimming pool.  Above it, you will see a broken line.  That line is defined at the bottom of the plan as “LIMIT OF WORK.”  The upper portion of the line is the southern boundary of Memorial Drive. .

Here is a closer view of that part of the new plan:



Across from the Magazine Beach Reservation at this point is a small shopping center which does have a good Memorial Drive frontage.  Part of the good frontage was a recent improvement by a new owner.  A very important important part of the frontage is the Memorial Drive Reservation, owned by the DCR.

The building next to the added destruction area houses a MicroCenter store.  In the new plans, the LIMIT OF WORK line continues to be the south side of Memorial Drive.  But the newer plan shows TWO of FIVE trees next to MicroCenter being destroyed.  They are shown in the upper right corner of this last map.

Destruction outside the LIMIT OF WORK area has been kept totally secret, but it was added in this fancy map very casually dropped at the Walk Around, and, of course, the expansion of the work zone was kept secret, unless you check out what amounts to fine print.  They most definitely did not divulge that the lovely new map included work outside the LIMIT OF WORK line.

Here is a photo showing the trees in front of MicroCenter.  It is a crop from a photo of the destruction not being kept secret.  I made the mistake of assuming a minimal level of honesty.  So, this is a crop of a side view of the Swimming Pool building.  I had the nerve to only do photographs of the area within the LIMIT OF WORK.

The red line around the doomed trees is yet another lie, this time a Lie of Fake Definition.

They use a very official sounding word which sounds so good, but which escapes me.  This lovely, official sounding word gives the DCR’s sales pitch the  LIE of apparent credibility.

As near as I understand the fancy word, according to the DCR, using this lovely official sounding word, the DCR has a right to destroy any tree which has passed its peak beauty, NO MATTER HOW EXCELLENT THE TREE IS..

For a tree that would live 100 years, that means that the DCR claims a right to destroy it if it has “ONLY” 50 years left to live.  NO MATTER HOW EXCELLENT THE TREE IS.

As a DCR example of this outrageous claim of right, the DCR shows trees which are clearly dead which were among the trees planted in the irresponsible work in the 2000s.  Trees possibly died because the DCR is so irresponsible, so the DCR brags that this gives the DCR the right to destroy trees which have “ONLY” fifty years left to live, no matter how magnificent.

Oh year, the name of the fake protective group appears on the amended plan.

The DCR should be replaced on the Charles River with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  MassDOT has been the adult in the room when faced with outrages on the Charles River from Cambridge and / or from the DCR.  Both MassDOT and the DCR were given their current responsibilities on the Charles River when the legislature destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission, in part because the MDC was so irresponsible.

The planners from the MDC went to the DCR with their plans and, so far have destroyed hundreds of trees east of the BU Bridge based on those irresponsible plans.  Now they and their friendswant to destroy 54 trees west of the BU Bridge.

The DCR’s most important friends, the contractors, want money.  The DCR is feeding them with Make Work for Contractors.

That is the name of the game, and that is what the legislature tried to kill when it killed the MDC.

As far as Cambridge goes, first of all, the Cambridge Development Department is fully consulted by the DCR. Secondly, a bit over a year ago the last City Manager of the City Manager Machine conducted a public meeting at which the last Machine City Manager bragged about the great things the CITY OF CAMBRIDGE is providing on the Charles River.  Not by coincidence, that City Manager managed the destruction which was inflicted on Magazine Beach in the 2000s.

Cambridge now has a City Manager who may be a new beginning after the three interrelated City Manager who were so outrageously destructive.  The Cambridge City Manager Machine thrived in the spirit of the destructive bureaucrats now with the DCR.

Hopefully, the new City Manager will have the spirit of a normal human being.  He seems impressive, and normal.

And, for the record, my video of the destruction already achieved is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Charles River: Contractors Make more Make Work Money Near Cambridge City Hall or new City Manager stepped in?

Charles River:  Contractors Make more Make Work Money Near Cambridge City Hall or new City Manager stepped in?

1. The Record.
2. The Update.
3. Explanation.
A. Bad.
B. Good.


1. The Record.

On September 15, 2016, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/charles-river-cambridge-extends-tree.html, I reported the City of Cambridge extending the destruction of trees to within sight of Cambridge City Hall.

Here are a couple of the photos.  The second was taken next to the undestroyed tree after the row of destruction in the first photo.




I find this outrage just a further step of a very destructive mentality which, in much larger scale, destroyed hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.  That situation was analyzed in my video posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

2. The Update.

Now we have saplings where were destroyed trees which were planted about 20 years ago.

The first photo shows the only tree in the block not destroyed, with City Hall the white tower with the clock and the building to its right.  The building to the left is the Central Square Post Office.  This photo shows one of the new saplings.  The second photo pretty much corresponds to the wasteland in the photo above.





3. Explanation.

A. Bad.

There are two ready explanations, one typically bad, the other perhaps good.

The bad explanation comes from the fact that a copy of the condensed version of the report, with two photos, was sent to every City Councilor.

To the best of my knowledge, although all of the city councilors were given notice with photographs, no action was taken.  And that is for an entire row of trees which extends almost within vision of Cambridge City Hall.  The following photo shows only undestroyed tree in that block with City Hall rising behind it.  This photo was included in my blog report and was in the condensed report which was emailed to all eight of the current city councilors who were in office then.
They simply cannot claim lack of knowledge.

There are markings on the sidewalk which give the impression of planned work, or, more likely, of some sort of construction under the sidewalk between the trees and the edge of the Post Office property.

It looks like, given that reality, that we are seeing just another aspect of the outrage on the Charles River: Contractors are given Make Work destroying perfectly good trees, and contractors are being given Make Work planting “replacements” for trees which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

PLUS the City of Cambridge benefits from another lie that Cambridge is environmentally saintly.  The replacements are that many trees they can claim in a lie that Cambridge deserves to be called a Tree City because the criterion for Tree City USA only counts trees planted.  It does not count which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

In addition, I am aware of at least one incident in which an entire residential block of perfectly good trees was destroyed to “improve” the neighborhood with saplings, and I have the definite impression that this was not the only such outrage..

The sales pitch is perfectly predictable: “How dare you object to our destroying that block full of healthy trees.  We put in saplings.”

English translation:  To Hell with the environment.  We have pleased our happy contractors, and we have a very active machine in place lying to the voters.

The situation on Cambridge streets and the outrage achieved and coming on the Charles River fits, demonstrating a decidedly reprehensible record.

And, oh yeah, this block adjoins an area where major work has just been completed.  Need I say more?

B. Good.

The other possible explanation could be that Cambridge has a new City Manager, and that the new City Manager noticed the outrage across the street from City Hall and ordered responsible behavior, to the extent anything related to the situation could be considered responsible.  I.e., City Manager DePasquale could have ordered the destruction be repaired, fast.

If this is the case, City Manage DePasquale is to be complimented.

Now how about firing the people who should not have done the destruction in the first place?  Particularly considering the fact that this outrage is not isolated.

Charles River:  Contractors Make more Money Near Cambridge City Hall or new City Manager earned praise

1. The Record.
2. The Update.
3. Explanation.
A. Bad.
B. Good.


1. The Record.

On September 15, 2016, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/charles-river-cambridge-extends-tree.html, I reported the City of Cambridge extending the destruction of trees to within sight of Cambridge City Hall.

Here are a couple of the photos.  The second was taken next to the undestroyed tree after the row of destruction in the first photo.




I find this outrage just a further step of a very destructive mentality which, in much larger scale, destroyed hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.  That situation was analyzed in my video posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

2. The Update.

Now we have saplings where were destroyed trees which were planted about 20 years ago.

The first photo shows the only tree in the block not destroyed, with City Hall the white tower with the clock and the building to its right.  The building to the left is the Central Square Post Office.  This photo shows one of the new saplings.  The second photo pretty much corresponds to the wasteland in the photo above.





3. Explanation.

A. Bad.

There are two ready explanations, one typically bad, the other perhaps good.

The bad explanation comes from the fact that a copy of the condensed version of the report, with two photos, was sent to every City Councilor.

To the best of my knowledge, although all of the city councilors were given notice with photographs, no action was taken.  And that is for an entire row of trees which extends almost within vision of Cambridge City Hall.  The following photo shows only undestroyed tree in that block with City Hall rising behind it.  This photo was included in my blog report and was in the condensed report which was emailed to all eight of the current city councilors who were in office then.
They simply cannot claim lack of knowledge.

There are markings on the sidewalk which give the impression of planned work, or, more likely, of some sort of construction under the sidewalk between the trees and the edge of the Post Office property.

It looks like, given that reality, that we are seeing just another aspect of the outrage on the Charles River: Contractors are given Make Work destroying perfectly good trees, and contractors are being given Make Work planting “replacements” for trees which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

PLUS the City of Cambridge benefits from another lie that Cambridge is environmentally saintly.  The replacements are that many trees they can claim in a lie that Cambridge deserves to be called a Tree City because the criterion for Tree City USA only counts trees planted.  It does not count which should not have been destroyed in the first place.

In addition, I am aware of at least one incident in which an entire residential block of perfectly good trees was destroyed to “improve” the neighborhood with saplings, and I have the definite impression that this was not the only such outrage..

The sales pitch is perfectly predictable: “How dare you object to our destroying that block full of healthy trees.  We put in saplings.”

English translation:  To Hell with the environment.  We have pleased our happy contractors, and we have a very active machine in place lying to the voters.

The situation on Cambridge streets and the outrage achieved and coming on the Charles River fits, demonstrating a decidedly reprehensible record.

And, oh yeah, this block adjoins an area where major work has just been completed.  Need I say more?

B. Good.

The other possible explanation could be that Cambridge has a new City Manager, and that the new City Manager noticed the outrage across the street from City Hall and ordered responsible behavior, to the extent anything related to the situation could be considered responsible.  I.e., City Manager DePasquale could have ordered the destruction be repaired, fast.

If this is the case, City Manage DePasquale is to be complimented.

Now how about firing the people who should not have done the destruction in the first place?  Particularly considering the fact that this outrage is not isolated.

Saturday, November 05, 2016

Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager DePasquale to Take Office on November 14, 2016? Proposed Contract.

Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager DePasquale to Take Office on November 14, 2016? Proposed Contract.

The Agenda for the Cambridge City Council meeting on November 7, 2016, includes a proposed contract of employment for Louis A. DePasquale, following up on the selection by the Cambridge City Council several weeks ago.

Congratulations and thanks are due to the City Manager Designate.

I assume that the contract would not be being offered to the Cambridge City Council if there were doubt that the Cambridge City Council would accept it.

Termination date is January 8, 2021.  The City Council must give Mr. DePaquale notice by September 14, 2021 should it wish to extend the period of employment.

The proposed contract is copied below from the City of Cambridge on line record.  It is in jpeg format and is readily readable by double clicking on each page.

I have delivered three letters to the Cambridge City Council as part of a series on the existing and pending outrages on the Charles River, as reported on this blog at

1. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-magazine-beach.html
2. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/to-cambridge-ma-usa-government.html
3. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/to-cambridge-ma-usa-do-not-destroy.html.

Report 1 includes a DVD of our video on the Destruction of the Charles River to each the City Council and City Manager.  Report 3 gives the City Council individual copies.

That video may be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

More letters are anticipated.  The current proposed outrage is massive by any normal standard.  I wish to ensure that the Cambridge City Council is clearly on record as having been made aware of the real situation.

The situation is outrageously irresponsible, with plans to make things much worse.

I have been awaiting the entry into service as City Manager of Mr. DePasquale, corecipient of these letters, so that he may receive these comments on the situation on the Charles River, with hopes that he can straighten things out.










Wednesday, November 02, 2016

To Cambridge, MA, USA: Do not destroy Magazine Beach or its Hill

To Cambridge, MA, USA: Do not destroy Magazine Beach or its Hill.

I. Introduction:
II. Letter.
1. Introduction.
2. Photos of the part of the outrage on the Magazine Beach hill facing Memorial Drive and the residential neighborhood.
a. Photos.
b. Defective Destruction Plan.
c. More detailed analysis.
3. Phil Barber tells the truth, magnificent grove overhanging playing fields, destruction of Little Guys Parking lot.
4. Proposed Solution.
5. Transmittal of DVD documenting the destruction of hundreds of trees east of this site by Cambridge and the DCR.
6. Conclusion.


I. Introduction:

I. Introduction:

We are doing a series of letters to the key figures in the Cambridge government on the latest attempts to increase destruction on the Charles River.  Cambridge has had a destructive, misleading three person City Manager Machine for the last 42 years.  A new City Manager has been selected but has yet to take office.  To put it nicely, there has been a lot of lying through omission on environmentally destructive initiatives under the Cambridge City Manager machine.   Environmentally, the city government created by that City Manager Machine is standing on a House of Cards.  False claims of environmentalism faced with reality could topple the House of Cards.

We would much rather communicate and give the City Council a chance to resemble its non stop claims of environmental sainthood.  The issue is the ongoing environmental destruction on the Charles River and elsewhere where this destructive city government has impact.  The pending, and surprisingly delayed, appointment  as City Manager of a person who not been in the middle of the outrage is a positive sign.

A major part reason for this series is to put on record that the Government of the City of Cambridge has been made aware of the next impending outrage on the Charles River.  It stems out of years of work with the City Manager Machine in the middle.  The 42 year record is one which an not be ignored.  It is a lot more difficult to lie about your record when your record is clearly documented, and hopefully, there will not be more things to lie about.

Our latest letter was hand delivered to the Cambridge City Clerk on November 1, 2016 so that it could be made part of the City Council Agenda on November 7, 2016.

This letter has been reformatted to fit this forum, and sectioning has been added to comport with the Internet norm.  There is limited wording change, but only, once again to comport with the change in forum.  One typo was corrected by hand in the submittal and corrected in this presentation electronically.

The DVD attachment to the letter is referenced in the original text by including the URL with identical content in the text.  That will ease the tasks of the readers of this blog, but also the task of the readers of the publicly available record of communications to the Cambridge City Council.  Delivering ten DVDs to the Cambridge City Clerk for the Cambridge City Council was probably a first, but the delivery, one for each member of the Cambridge City Council, one for public record, makes claims of lack of knowledge that much less credible.

II. Letter.

1. Introduction.

November 1, 2016

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

City Council, City of Cambridge, c/o City Clerk
City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA   02139

RE: Charles River Destruction 3, the Magazine Beach hill, DVDs of destruction accomplished so far.

Gentlemen / Ladies:

On October 4, and 26, 2016, I hand delivered my previous letters on this topic to the Cambridge City Council, care of the City Clerk.  I hope that, by the time I deliver this follow up, City Manager DePasquale will be in office, so I can deliver the October 4 and 26, 2016 letters with this one. [ed: He apparently was not yet in office.]

2. Photos of the part of the outrage on the Magazine Beach hill facing Memorial Drive and the residential neighborhood.

a. Photos.

Here is another very major view proposed to for all practical purposes be destroyed on Memorial Drive, the view opposite Magazine Street.  Photos move from west to east.







b. Defective Destruction Plan.

Here is the relevant part of the destruction plans submitted by the Department of Conservation and Recreation.  I realize the plans are deficient in that they UNDERSTATE destruction, including clearly fraudulent understatements.  



c. More detailed analysis.

The magnificent tree in the first photo shows for destruction in this plan exerpt under the word “clearly” in the text.  The tree to its left in the photo, right in the plan is being destroyed in the plan.  EVERY TREE BUT THREE IS DESTROYED FROM THE STREET TREE TO THE BACK OF THE proposed to be destroyed LITTLE GUY’S PARKING LOT (the semi-circular road).  Note as well, on the right on this plan, two more trees south of the pedestrian over pass being destroyed, JUST IN THIS PARTIAL PLAN.  

Total tree destruction on the hill / bathhouse area is THIRTY, which has been admitted by the Cheerleaders.  This FRAUDULENT PLAN, as presented in my last letter, without the cropping, SAYS TWENTY-THREE.

A FAKE SHOW WAS PRESENTED IN THE CITY HALL ANNEX TOTALLY LYING THROUGH OMISSION ABOUT ALL THIS DESTRUCTION, ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE LACK OF FITNESS OF THE 42 YEAR MANAGER MACHINE, which, hopefully is dead.  This presentation with its lies of omission was compatible with others in the 42 year period.

Those Machine presentations look so good as long as the presentations lie through omission about the terrible things being done and kept secret.

3. Phil Barber tells the truth, magnificent grove overhanging playing fields, destruction of Little Guys Parking lot.

By contrast, here is an email from the top expert on Magazine Beach that I am aware of.  Phil Barber.

* * * *

Hi Bob, thanks for the updates. I am horrified (though not surprised) that they propose to destroy that beautiful grove of cottonwoods. I've been observing and photographing them for decades. Magazine Beach's resident red tailed hawk calls those trees home. A few of them have died and could be taken down for safety but the rest are solid strong trees with many years of life left. There is another stand of cottonwoods in the old SImplex area, which follows the curve of the former railroad spur that ran behind Sidney and Albany Streets (near Emily), and they are much larger and older and are flourishing.

It also interests me that the small parking loop near the pool opposite the gas station is to be removed. In the summer I see mostly black families from Riverside enjoying the picnic tables there by this parking place and I wonder if, that in true "liberal" hypocrisy, restricting their access is also part of "improving" our park for the gentrifiers.

* * * *

Here again, is the photo from the my October 4 letter, and the clearly fraudulent part of the plan which says THREE rather than TEN trees are being destroyed.  

A major difference between HONEST, RESPONSIBLE people such as Phil and the irresponsible DCR / Cambridge City Manager machine is that Phil clearly states that some of the trees in the grove are dead.  THE RESPONSIBLE TREATMENT, as proposed by Phil, IS TO CHOP DOWN THE DEAD TREES.  THE DCR / CITY MANAGER TREATMENT IS TO DESTROY EVERYTHING, AND THEN DESTROY, DESTROY, DESTROY SOME MORE, AND LIE ABOUT THEIR OUTRAGE through that fake show in the Annex.




Direction of view is opposite between the plan and the photo.  In the plan, the playing fields are on the right.  In the photo, they are on the left.  The pathway shows on both.

Myself, I am not an expert.  I am simply trying to compare deliberate false statements with other documentation I can get.

An excellent example of Phil Barber’s more than thirty year experience is the photo essay he has posted about the Charles River White Geese dating back to the 1980s at http://www.historicpages.com/geese/wg.htm.

4. Proposed Solution.

There are a few reasonable ways to end this outrage.  

One is through requests.  This makes sense, but has next to no value particularly since the Metropolitan District Commission graduates in the DCR can and have gone forward with almost no warning.  Plus they have played games with the legislature.  The legislature allowed them to destroy between the BU and Longfellow Bridge years after their approvals expired, almost certainly being lied to by omission about the true impact of what they were doing.  

Claims of “lack of jurisdiction” in Cambridge government are silly.  Very clearly, the DCR is closer than the many governments of the world the Cambridge City Council frequently addresses; the destruction is occurring in the City of Cambridge;  Cambridge has funded destruction on the Charles River; Cambridge’s Development Department is consulted AND HAS BEEN CONSULTED on these outrages, and Cambridge has Home Rule rights over actions within the community.  Any claim of lack of jurisdiction is nonsense.

The option of most meaningful value is to get rid of the DCR legislatively, initiating the legislative process at the same time as initiating discussions.

Implement the wishes of the legislature when it destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission.  The legislature tried to protect the Charles from the destructiveness of the MDC bureaucrats.  Obtain legislation to get rid of the DCR on the Charles River in Cambridge, transferring funds and jurisdiction to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  MassDOT has been the adult in the room in Charles River matters in which the DCR and the Cambridge City Manager Machine have been very destructive children.  Home rule legislation is Cambridge’s right.

The smart legislative option would be initiate transfer action through vote of the Cambridge City Council and action of Cambridge’s legislative team with proper rearrangement of funding from the DCR to MassDOT.  FURTHER TRANSFER OF MANAGERS AND / OR PLANNERS, this time to MassDOT should be FORBIDDEN.  The existing outrages are by Metropolitan District Commission functionaries who took their outrages with them to the DCR when the legislature properly destroyed the MDC.  The MDC alumni, have since destroyed, destroyed, destroyed in the name of the DCR.

Unfortunately, the irresponsible MDC bureaucrats survived in the DCR and, with the support and approval of the Cambridge City Manager Machine, are aggressively destroying Cambridge’s part of the Charles River.  Legislative action takes time, and the DCR has demonstrated the ability to destroy rapidly and with vigor.

In the interim, Cambridge should exercise the right OF CONTROL OF MAGAZINE BEACH transferred to Cambridge in the agreement for destruction of the 2000s.  The Chief MDC / DCR destructive bureaucrat has publicly admitted the willingness of the DCR to respect the transfer agreement by which the MDC got money for the 2000s destruction.  That destruction was managed by Rossi as top assistant to then City Manager Healy.

With control, it is essential that the City of Cambridge, in addition to finally ending these outrageous plans, destroy the bizarre introduced wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles, and end the use of poisons on all parts of the Charles River.  

This starvation wall is targeted at the Charles River White Geese.  It was promised to be a “lawn to the river.”  

Poison use on the Charles River is a love of the DCR/MDC bureaucrats.  It is always kept secret in the “planning” process.  The annual algae infestation of the Charles dates back to the MDC dumping poisons on Ebersol Field next to the Massachusetts General Hospital marked “Do not use near water.”  Less destructive poisons were not working.  The next day, the Charles River was dead from Boston Harbor to the Mass. Ave. Bridge.  It comes back every year.

5. Transmittal of DVD documenting the destruction of hundreds of trees east of this site by Cambridge and the DCR.

With my October 4 letter I transmitted a copy to the City Manager and a copy to the City Council of my video on the destruction already accomplished on the Charles River by the City Manager Machine and by the DCR.

I should have provided the City Council with individual copies.  Ten copies are attached to the City Council copy of this communication, one for each City Councilor, one for file.  Should members of the Cambridge City Council prefer, the identical video is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

6. Conclusion.

End this outrage.  End it now.  Thank you in advance for your responsible behavior.

Sincerely,


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

Enclosures: As stated

Friday, October 28, 2016

The Biggest Expert on Magazine Beach speaks out on the Impending Outrage

The Biggest Expert on Magazine Beach speaks out on the Impending Outrage

1. Comment from Phil Barber
2. Phil Barber’s experience.
3. The Rest of Us.


1. Comment from Phil Barber

I have, on October 28, received the following from Phil Barber in response to the email version of my report on the Cambridge Conservation Commission tour of Magazine Beach at:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-spot-report-tour-of.html.

Phil's Comments:

* * * * *

Hi Bob, thanks for the updates. I am horrified (though not surprised) that they propose to destroy that beautiful grove of cottonwoods. I've been observing and photographing them for decades. Magazine Beach's resident red tailed hawk calls those trees home. A few of them have died and could be taken down for safety but the rest are solid strong trees with many years of life left. There is another stand of cottonwoods in the old SImplex area, which follows the curve of the former railroad spur that ran behind Sidney and Albany Streets (near Emily), and they are much larger and older and are flourishing.

It also interests me that the small parking loop near the pool opposite the gas station is to be removed. In the summer I see mostly black families from Riverside enjoying the picnic tables there by this parking place and I wonder if, that in true "liberal" hypocrisy, restricting their access is also part of "improving" our park for the gentrifiers.

2. Phil Barber’s experience.

Phil’s knowledge and dedication is clearly the best.

Phil has been visiting and recording Magazine Beach since the 1980's.

Phil has recorded Magazine Beach and the Charles River White Geese at http://www.historicpages.com/geese/wg.htm, with photos dating back to the 1980's.  Please check them.  You will like them.

Here my favorite of his photos, from the late 2000s, the Charles River White Ducks.


He predates the rest of us by decades.

3. The Rest of Us.

I first learned of the plans to destroy Magazine Beach from the announcement of one of the fake groups that they were working to “improve,” i.e. destroy, Magazine Beach in 1996.

They presented destruction plans from the Cambridge City Manager in 1997.

These plans achieved some terrible things in the 2000s, and are being made worse by the matters I am currently reporting.

For years, all I could get from anybody was that “they would never stoop so low.”

In 1999, I obtained the then plans from the now legislature destroyed Metropolitan District Commission.

The MDC planning chief, on providing me the copy, pointed out the small areas where her plans deviated from those created by the Cambridge City Manager for the fake group.

Those plans ARE THE BASIS FOR THE CURRENT OUTRAGE.

The first destruction was done by Boston University in accordance with an illegal contract with the MDC by which Boston University attempted, unsuccessfully, to turn the Destroyed Nesting Area into part of the Boston University campus.

Starting in March 2000, when the Charles River White Geese returned to their nesting area, Friends of the White Geese publicly organized.

In those early days, we had a two person core group.  We created Friends of the White Geese and obtained Attorney General recognition.  We each met the people who were most involved.

Reen LittleBrook, a Native American was, at that time the best friend to the Charles River White Geese.  He provided them full friendship and assistance.  He treated their medical problems with traditional Native American remedies.

LittleBrook, a few years later, got a bicycle.  A few days after that he got into a traffic accident and wound up in the hospital and rehab for months.  He, to his regret, is no longer physically able to return to aiding the Charles River White Geese.

First my cocreator took over the feeding.  Then we and friends created The Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative as a federally tax exempt organization to take over the duties LittleBrook did.  That entity is so far separate from the Friends of the White Geese that I really do not have a good contact for them except to look for them at the Destroyed Nesting Area.

While, clearly, LittleBrook and the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative have been the people closest to the Charles River White Geese since about 1996 or a bit earlier, and I and others have been doing the political activity since 1999, Phil Barber predates us by decades.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

To Cambridge, MA, USA Government: Governmental Destruction on the Charles River, Late 2016, Part 2

To Cambridge, MA, USA Government:  Governmental Destruction on the Charles River, Late 2016, Part 2

1. Introduction.
2. Scanned copy..
3. Copy, usable format for this blog.


1. Introduction.

On October 26, 2016, I delivered a letter to the Cambridge City Clerk for the City Council (copy noted for the incoming City Manager) at its next meeting.  The letter is reproduced in section 3 below as best works for this medium.  Rather amazingly, City Manager DePasquale does not seem to have taken office yet.  So I am now holding two letters for him.

Because the format of this letter cannot meaningfully be transmitted in the blog medium, I am providing a scanned copy of the letter in section 2, then the Blog readable copy in section 3.

This is my second formal transmittal on this outrage.  I am trying to communicate without overloading.  The first transmittal was the original, fraudulent plans.  This second transmittal goes into the fraud proven in the plans during the Cambridge Conservation Commission site review.

That leaves me with the outrages in the rest of the plans including analysis of the lies through word games, plus there are detailed documents to be provided.

The DCR submitted a subsequent sales pitch to the Cambridge Conservation Commission which purports to be a plan.  It is dominated by the DCR’s lies through fake definition, and I very seriously doubt if I want to dignify that beautiful lie with publishing it here.  The DCR is admitting more destruction in that beautiful than appeared in the fraudulent plans.  So I am at a loss as to how to communicate the additional four trees they currently admit to destroying in addition to those in the fraudulent plans.

I filed an extensive email complaint about the fraudulent plans to what appears to be a centralized part of the DCR and got a response that it is being passed on to what appears to be the appropriate person.

I anticipate I will next pass on to the Cambridge City Council a copy of the email complaint to the DCR.  I will also try to figure out if council rules allow me to formally get individual copies of the DVD containing the record of hundreds of trees already destroyed by the DCR, Cambridge and their Cheerleaders.

2. Scanned copy..






3. Copy, usable format for this blog.

October 26, 2016

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

City Council, City of Cambridge, c/o City Clerk
City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA   02139

RE: Governmental Destruction on the Charles River, Late 2016, Part 2

Gentlemen / Ladies:

On October 4, 2016, I hand delivered my previous letter on this topic to the Cambridge City Council, care of the City Clerk.  I hope that, by the time I deliver this follow up, City Manager DePasquale will be in office, so I can deliver the October 4, 2016 letter with this one.

This photo is of one of the most visible targets for destruction left on the Charles River by the Cambridge City Manager Machine, the Department of Conservation and Recreation and their Cheerleaders.  It is a magnificent grove looming over the western end of the Magazine Beach playing fields.



A bit over a year ago, then Cambridge City Manager Rossi told a gathering at the main branch of the Cambridge Public Library that Cambridge was greatly improving the Charles River.  Since, on environmental matters, there was a tradition in the three member Cambridge City Manager Machine, from 1974 to, hopefully, 2016, that such proclamations were usually more important for the lies of omission than for the proud things the then City Manager wanted folks to know about, I did not go in.

Earlier this year, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, with the obvious support and approval of the Cambridge City Manager Machine and their Cheerleaders, destroyed hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges with a lot more coming.  My video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o summarizes this outrage.

Among other things, secret fine print in the City Council’s Grand Junction plans is intended to make the outrage on the Charles River worse.

Imminent is the destruction of 54 mostly excellent trees on Magazine Beach, at least 30 of them on the hill between the playing fields and the swimming pool.  I gave you the falsified DCR plans for this destruction in my letter of October 4, 2016.

I say “falsified” because it turns out that, currently known planned destruction on the Hill is not 23 but 30, once you get through the lies of fake words.  The photo on the first page is of that beautiful grove which is claimed to be of three trees.  Looking at the grove which is targeted by the DCR / Cambridge in reality, it clearly is ten trees.

Here is the lying plan which I gave to you in my letter of October 4, 2016.  Decent human beings should not be subjected to such outrageous destruction.  Decent human beings should not have to be subjected to repeated lies concerning outrageous destruction.

Emblematic of this outrage is the ten tree grove on the hill which trees proudly dominate the playing fields.

The same people who just destroyed hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges want to destroy 54 trees and rising at Magazine Beach.

In addition to many other outrages, the hopefully dead City Manager Machine. the DCR and their Cheerleaders want to destroy this excellent TEN TREE grove as part of the 30 trees they are destroying on the Magazine Beach hill.

The flat out lie in the formally submitted plans is at the right margin, about a third of the way from the bottom of this plan.   10 doomed trees are shown as 3. [ed: paragraph modified to comport to blog presentation.]



These TEN DOOMED TREES loom over the Magazine Beach playing fields.

On this plan, the rectangle which is at an angle and to the left of the doomed trees is the bathhouse Cambridge’s cheerleaders have been telling folks is the only thing they should look at on the Charles River.  This was while Cambridge and the DCR were destroying those hundreds of trees.  It turns out that another thing these destructive people do not want folks to look at is the THIRTY trees these people are destroying near that bathhouse, and to minimize the scope of their outrage, they are lying that the destruction is TWENTY-THREE trees.

Here are photos of reality, TEN TREES NOT THREE in that grove, making the hill total 30 and climbing and the overall total 54 and climbing.  These photos were taken this last weekend.














These photographs IN NO WAY should be interpreted as showing the full scale of the outrage, simply a most visible part, about which the DCR is indulging in corrupt tactics.

The real purpose behind the pending destruction is, of course, the same as in the destruction achieved earlier this year: Make Work for Contractors.

If we were dealing with a responsible entity, it would be easy to get the guilty bureaucrats fired for lying in these formally submitted plans.  We are not dealing with a responsible entity.  We are dealing with people who just destroyed hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges and want to destroy 54 more and rising..  We are dealing with the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.

There are a few reasonable ways to end this outrage.

One is through requests.  This makes sense, but has next to no value particularly since they can and have gone forward with almost no warning.  Plus they have played games with the legislature such as the legislature’s allowing them to destroy years after their approvals expired.

Claims of “lack of jurisdiction” in Cambridge government are silly.  Last I noticed, the DCR is closer than the many governments of the world the Cambridge City Council frequently addresses; the destruction is occurring in the City of Cambridge;  Cambridge has funded destruction on the Charles River; Cambridge’s Development Department is consulted AND HAS BEEN CONSULTED on these outrages.  Any claim of lack of jurisdiction is nonsense.

The option of most meaningful value is to get rid of the DCR legislatively, initiating the legislative process at the same time as initiating discussions.

Implement the wishes of the legislature when it destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission.  The legislature tried to protect the Charles from the destructiveness of the MDC bureaucrats.  Obtain legislation to get rid of the DCR on the Charles River, transferring funds and jurisdiction to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.  MassDOT has been the adult in the room in Charles River matters in which the DCR and Cambridge have been very destructive children.  Home rule legislation is Cambridge’s right.

The smart legislative option would be transfer action by Cambridge’s legislative team with proper rearrangement of funding to MassDOT, but TRANSFER OF MANAGERS AND / OR PLANNERS FORBIDDEN.  The existing outrages are by Metropolitan District Commission functionaries who took their outrages with them to the DCR and destroyed, destroyed, destroyed.

Unfortunately, the irresponsible MDC bureaucrats survived in the DCR and, with the support and approval of the Cambridge City Manager Machine, are aggressively destroying Cambridge’s part of the Charles River.  Legislative action takes time, and the DCR has demonstrated the ability to destroy rapidly and with vigor.

In the interim, Cambridge should exercise the right OF CONTROL OF MAGAZINE BEACH transferred to Cambridge in the agreement for destruction of the 2000s.  The Chief MDC / DCR destroyer has publicly admitted the willingness of the DCR to respect the transfer agreement by which they got the money for the 2000s destruction which was managed by Rossi as top assistant to then City Manager Healy.

With control, it is essential that the City of Cambridge, in addition to finally ending these outrageous plans, destroy the bizarre introduced wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles, and end the use of poisons on all parts of the Charles River.

End this outrage.  End it now.

Sincerely,


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

Sunday, October 23, 2016

Charles River: Request to DCR - Fire Key Charles River Manager for Fraud.

Charles River: Request to DCR - Fire Key Charles River Manager for Fraud.

I. Introduction.
II. Key provisions.
A. DCR 0. Supplement / Executive Summary.
B. DCR 5. Documentation of MDC / DCR unfitness, including unfitness of supposed “protectors” of the neighborhood.
C. DCR 5.C.  c. 10/17/16, Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.
D. Blog Report, 1.e. Bizarre SECRET definition of “trees”
III. Link and key photos.
IV. Letter to DCR main, unedited.
V. Link to blog post appended in whole to DCR communication following the above.


I. Introduction.

The situation at Magazine Beach on the Charles River after the “public meeting” on Thursday is that proposed tree destruction has gone from 42 overall with 23 on the hill above the playing field to, and, this is a minimal number: 51 overall, 30 on the hill.

This number allows for the outright fraud and for increases in the latest plans.  I have not fully evaluated the latest plans to see if there are more secret omissions of added destruction.

Here is a photo of the threatened grove at an appreciative distance.  It needs to be viewed from a distance to be appreciated.



Here are photos of the grove of ten trees from the ground.














Here is the lie submitted by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation to the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  The TEN TREES are shown on the right side, a third of the way from the bottom, as THREE trees.



I am doing the best a private party can do in these counts, dealing with bureaucrats who routinely lie through omission and other forms of very real lies.  It is almost certain I will get something wrong.  That is forced when you are doing your best to wade through a corrupt package.

The key manager should be placed in the firing process and his application to the Cambridge Conservation Commission withdrawn with an apology by the Department of Conservation and Recreation because the plans KNOWINGLY LIE.  They reflect 10 trees on the hill as 3.

For this deliberate falsification of plans alone, the key manager should be suspended and placed in the firing review process, and the DCR should apologize to the Cambridge Conservation Commission and withdraw the application.

Thursday night varied between this outright fraud and the sort of gentlemen’s fraud which is so normal with the City of Cambridge and its accomplices.

A “public meeting” with a time limit saw the key speaker speak VERY SLOWLY and drag things to yell lack of time at the end.  And thus conduct a fraudulent “public meeting” which prevented public comment.

I will go into the knowing fraud below.  The gentlemen’s fraud was dominated by lying through word games.

Basically, a lot of excellent trees are being destroyed and the DCR claims to have a right to destroy them because they might die in the next 10, or 20, or 30 or 40, or 50 years.  They are beyond their prime.  How dare you expect the DCR not to destroy them.

Excellence of the trees being destroyed is no excuse according to this fraudulent sales pitch.

A tiny number of nearly problematic trees were given as example and there are trees in bad shape.

The trees that I am aware of that are in worst shape are trees which the DCR and Cambridge planted in the outrage of the 2000s.  There are three (out of 50 plus proposed for destruction) which are in terrible shape.  These are DCR trees from the 2000s.  There are a small number of others which are far along.

Most of the trees this destructive entity wants to destroy are truly excellent trees, using a lie of word games.  “Declining” includes trees beyond the mid point of their life even though they are massive, excellent and very much worthy of admiration.

Here is an excellent example of the vileness of this lie.

Here is the grove of ten excellent trees which dominates the view of the Magazine Beach hill from the Magazine Beach playing fields.  The DCR wants to destroy them all.  It also lies that the ten trees are only three trees, and calls all of them “in decline,” and thus worthy of destruction by them.



I gave closer shots of this excellent grove above.

I am going to proceed with my email communication of the early morning of October 21, 2016, to DCR headquarters by pulling out portions for the purpose of communicating with you.  I will follow up with the communication unedited and a link to my last report on this blog, which was reproduced in full in the DCR headquarters communication following what is reproduced here.

II. Key provisions.

A. DCR 0. Supplement / Executive Summary.

It is my strong opinion, as it has been since my initial exposure to him in 2000, that Mr. Corsi should be fired for incompetence.

Please see point 5.c in this main document, below, and section 1.e. in the copy following the main document which copy transmits my comments on the view on Wednesday, October 19, during which the fraud in the filing was admitted with a bizarre claims of reality.

The fraud in the filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission adds to grounds for firing.

That fraud in the filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission should cause the Department of Conservation and Recreation to withdraw the currently pending Magazine Beach application to the Cambridge Conservation Commission with apologies to the CCC.

The next meeting of the CCC is next Monday evening.  Responsible action should be taken by then.  That will give you time for a site visit, preferably today (Cambridge work hours end at 12 noon), and a comparison of the fraudulent plans to reality, followed by suspension of Corsi, followed by termination after proper due process.

This email is being copied to the Cambridge Conservation Commission because of the fraud in the filing and because one or more Commission members and / or staff were present during the admission, with bizarre explanation, of the fraud.

B. DCR 5. Documentation of MDC / DCR unfitness, including unfitness of supposed “protectors” of the neighborhood.

A review of my video on the hundreds of trees already destroyed, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o will show you the lack of fitness of your MDC bequeathed employees.

A review of my posts with photographs, at the following URLs will show you the horror which your unfit employees are implementing:

C. DCR 5.C.  c. 10/17/16, Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.   http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-first-magazine-beach.html.

Note: this was written before the view.  At that time, I did not realize that the MDC / DCR plans submitted to the Conservation Commission were FALSIFIED, at minimum lying that TEN TREES were THREE.  So I referred to three where there really are ten.

I am still in the process of evaluation.  Clearly the situation is, not surprisingly, very terrible.

[ed.  Please follow the link.]

D. Blog Report, 1.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:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-another-magnificent-grove.html.

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.

III. Link and key photos.

The blog post which was appended to the end may be read at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-spot-report-tour-of.html.

I have presented the key photos and the lying plans are presented at the beginning of this report.

Here is my fact sheet passed to the chair of the fake public input meeting.



IV. Letter to DCR main, unedited.

RE: Magazine Beach Fake Public Hearing; Request for Firing of Key Manager for Fraud in Filing with Cambridge Conservation Commission and for Incompetence.

0. Supplement / Executive Summary.
1. Fake Public Hearing
2. This outrage is part of the Reason the Legislature destroyed the MDC.
3. Quality of vegetation being destroyed.
4. Contempt for the Charles / Deliberate Starvation of Resident Animals / Tourist Attractions.  DELIBERATE, HEARTLESS ANIMAL ABUSE.
5. Documentation of MDC / DCR unfitness, including unfitness of supposed “protectors” of the neighborhood.
6. Example of the lack of fitness of the MDC/DCR’s designated “protector.”
7. Contractors love you.
8. Environmental destruction which would be major except for the very much more major outrages from your MDC graduates.
9. My detailed analysis on the view of October 19.

Breakout of analysis of October 19 view:

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.



0. Supplement / Executive Summary.

It is my strong opinion, as it has been since my initial exposure to him in 2000, that Mr. Corsi should be fired for incompetence.

Please see point 5.c in this main document, below, and section 1.e. in the copy following the main document which copy transmits my comments on the view on Wednesday, October 19, during which the fraud in the filing was admitted with a bizarre claims of reality.

The fraud in the filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission adds to grounds for firing.

That fraud in the filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission should cause the Department of Conservation and Recreation to withdraw the currently pending Magazine Beach application to the Cambridge Conservation Commission with apologies to the CCC.

The next meeting of the CCC is next Monday evening.  Responsible action should be taken by then.  That will give you time for a site visit, preferably today (Cambridge work hours end at 12 noon), and a comparison of the fraudulent plans to reality, followed by suspension of Corsi, followed by termination after proper due process.

This email is being copied to the Cambridge Conservation Commission because of the fraud in the filing and because one or more Commission members and / or staff were present during the admission, with bizarre explanation, of the fraud.

1. Fake Public Hearing

Your hearing of October 20, 2016 was a fraud conducted on short and nearly nonexistent notice, in the manner regularly conducted by your graduates from the Metropolitan District Commission.

The speaker stretched out his presentation SLOWLY so as to fill all the time allotted and prevent meaningful input, a follow up on maneuvering the legislature to go forward on the destruction of hundreds of trees earlier this year by making “valid” approvals which expired years ago.

Your fraudulent performances have been so bad that NOW EXPIRED hearings on destruction of those hundreds of trees which you accomplished in January and February were conducted in the bowels of MIT to prevent public comment.  This was one more of the same fraud.

Enclosed is my public fact sheet which I submitted to the chair and incorporated by reference recognizing that public comment had been carefully prevented by stretching out and stretching out VERY SLOWLY the presentation.

To summarize the below, the DCR through its destructive MDC incompetents is unfit for management of the Charles River and should be replaced by MassDOT which has been the adult in the room on key matters with the DCR/MDC and the City of Cambridge.  Replacement should specifically prohibit transfer of DCR/MDC planners and managers.

The City of Cambridge MAY be cleaning up their problems by the City Council’s selection of a new City Manager who is not a direct part of the outrage of the last 42 years.  Hopefully the DCR or the legislature will end the outrages for which the DCR/MDC is responsible without further outrages.

2. This outrage is part of the Reason the Legislature destroyed the MDC.

One reason why the legislature destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission was that it was so destructive.

And what has been done to Memorial Drive and is being done to Memorial Drive WITH MDC PLANS is exactly why the legislature destroyed the Metropolitan District Commission.

So a bunch of bureaucrats who were unfit for their jobs with the MDC were transferred to the DCR with irresponsible plans and fake definition of terms and lying through omission.

You are destroying a bunch of excellent trees using code words with secret meanings and they do not even fit the secret meanings.

The unfair definitions are so bad that, in one key location, YOUR UNFIT EMPLOYEES DEFINED ten trees as three.

3. Quality of vegetation being destroyed.

Most trees being destroyed are excellent.  Excellent trees are being destroyed because they, while excellent, have passed the 50% point on their lifespan but, much more importantly, because the contractors need money, and a brief look at the 50 trees and climbing being destroyed, not just the tiny minority they brag of destroying, with show you that you have unfit employees.

4. Contempt for the Charles / Deliberate Starvation of Resident Animals / Tourist Attractions.  DELIBERATE, HEARTLESS ANIMAL ABUSE.

Your unfit employees claim to love the Charles River, and one of the almost total unnegotiable points is blocking off the Charles River.  With a wall of bushes preventing access to the animals who have lived and fed on these grasses for most of the last 35 years because the MDC, now DCR has a policy of killing off or driving away all resident animals.

That wall of bushes installed through the usual lies of omission has cause human beings to avoid the Charles area which should be the big attraction.

And the beautiful, TOURIST ATTRACTION Charles River White Geese are deliberately starved by a long, bizarre wall preventing access TO WHERE THEY LIVED AND FED FOR MOST OF THE LAST 35 YEARS.  The MDC, now DCR’s policy is heartless animal abuse.  So that is what you are doing.

This bizarre wall is being partially “lowered” while keeping it high enough to implement the deliberate starvation and to destroy Magazine Beach as a water related resource.

This bizarre wall was created through flat out lying in the supposedly sacred Charles River Master Plan.  Plans for the playing fields described as a “Lawn to the River,” words which were changed after the lies paved the way.

The bizarre wall is another ADMITTED failure.

The treatment of the Charles River White Geese at their Destroyed Nesting Area to which they have been confined without food has included actions so bad that the Cambridge Conservation Commission stepped in.  And your incompetent manager ordered the destroying parties to cease their outrage WITHIN THE TINY JURISDICTION OF THE CCC, WHILE SPECIFICALLY ALLOWING CONTINUED OUTRAGES outside that small area.

5. Documentation of MDC / DCR unfitness, including unfitness of supposed “protectors” of the neighborhood.

A review of my video on the hundreds of trees already destroyed, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o will show you the lack of fitness of your MDC bequeathed employees.

A review of my posts with photographs, at the following URLs will show you the horror which your unfit employees are implementing:

a. 10/18/16, Swimming Pool Destruction, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-destruction-threatened.html, goes into the outrage around the Swimming Pool.

b. 10/16/16, Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-another-magnificent-grove.html.  Excellent grove being destroyed which is on the hill, but towers over the playing fields.

c. 10/17/16, Charles River: Another magnificent grove threatened by DCR and its Accomplices.   http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-first-magazine-beach.html.

Note: this was written before the view.  At that time, I did not realize that the MDC / DCR plans submitted to the Conservation Commission were FALSIFIED, at minimum lying that TEN TREES were THREE.  So I referred to three where there really are ten.

I am still in the process of evaluation.  Clearly the situation is, not surprisingly, very terrible.

d 10/12/16, Charles River, First Magazine Beach Photos, Hill / Swimming Pool DESTRUCTION.  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-first-magazine-beach.html.  Provides photos of doomed trees on the hill west of the playing fields.

e. 10/6/16, Charles River, Magazine Beach Destruction Plans, Plea to Cambridge.  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-magazine-beach.html.  Includes extensive analysis of a corrupt governmental situation.

The Cambridge City Council is taking action hopefully, to end the City Manager Machine outrage which has been in place since 1974.  The City Manager select to which this letter is addressed is the first new manager since 1974 who is not the top management assistant to his predecessor.  As of this writing, he is still being worked into his new office.

And that City Manager machine is the one around which has been created the fake “protective” groups such as that Ms. Suzi represents.  Her group brags that it has A DUTY TO CENSOR ALL comments on its Listserv negative to the City Manager / his friends.

The fake group fits into a Machine starting with the first of the, hopefully outgoing, City Manager Machine city managers.  James Leo Sullivan had been fired in the 60s.  When he was rehired in 1974, he promised to create a system of “neighborhood associations” which in turn, have people who go to the city government to find out what they think.  I am aware key group member bragging of “expertise,” but in the fine print bragging of going to the City Manager Machine to find out what they think.

The basis for Ms. Suzi’s supposed representation of the neighborhood is a fraudulent machination on April 23, 2013.  They tried to get support for the current outrage in their January 2013 MONTHLY meeting, and could not because of very real displeasure in the meeting, so they told a displeased public meeting to come back at their next monthly meeting.  They then conducted their next monthly meeting more three months later to drive away responsible people.

A horribly complicated motion was discussed in the last ten minutes of the meeting and kept secret until them.  They had driven away responsible people, but they took no chances on any semblance of responsibility.

Since then, they have functioned as an efficient company union, conducting their monthly meetings on a suddenly bimonthly basis.  They openly prevent discussion of environmental outrages until the last ten minutes, timing which is EXACTLY WHAT YOUR INCOMPETENT MANAGERS DID on October 20.

f. 10/3/16, Charles River:  Cambridge Cheerleaders fight to Destroy 42 MORE Trees, at Magazine Beach.  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-cambridge-cheerleaders.html.

This series of reports is not complete.  To continue watching YOUR outrages, simply subscribe to the reports at charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com.

The lies of omission are getting more clear, as shown here and in the attached factsheet.  The lies of fake definitions, like the TEN TREES which show up as THREE TREES on the plan are also becoming more clear.

6. Example of the lack of fitness of the MDC/DCR’s designated “protector.”

You have an unfit bunch of employees feeding into a terrible situation in the City of Cambridge with a destructive city government in power as a directly related series of City Managers since 1974.  Around this destructive City Manager Machine has been created a destructive collection of “protective groups” which simply obey orders.

An excellent example of lack of fitness of the City of Cambridge machine into which your unfit employees are feeding occurred when Dr. Robin Pope, a visiting professor and international expert and scholar attempted to communicate to Kathy Suzi after the fake public meeting.  Kathy Suzi is your MDC incompetents designated “defender” of the world.  Pope’s impassioned and well spoken EXPERT plea was replied to by Suzi with directions to talk to your unfit manager on the grounds that he is the guy who does the thinking.

Dr. Pope is doing extended research here as part of her duties with the University of Graz in Austria.  She lives in the Hyatt Regency Cambridge.

Suzi, in turn, is the third head the fake “protective” organization has had in a year.  The “leaders” are running away from the terrible things you AND THEY are doing, washing their hands of responsibility which they really share.

7. Contractors love you.

But the contractors love it.  Among so many other blatant wastes of money, they are paid to destroy excellent trees and they are paid to install saplings to replace trees which should not be destroyed.

8. Environmental destruction which would be major except for the very much more major outrages from your MDC graduates.

We have an annual algae blight on the Charles River which stems from your MDC people’s love for the use of poisons on the banks of the Charles River.  One year, their beloved poisons did not work as well as they would like at Ebersol Field near Massachusetts General Hospital, so they dumped poisons on the riverbank marked “DO NOT USE NEAR WATER.”  THE NEXT DAY the Charles River was dead from Boston Harbor to the Mass. Ave. Bridge.

And, as predicted then, the infestation created by your incompetent MDC graduates comes back every year.

Responsible grass management during the 20th Century was replaced, with lies of omission, at the Magazine Beach Playing Fields with poison maintenance.  The poisons, like the bizarre wall were kept secret during planning and simply done.

The poisons have been a failure.  So USE OF POISONS IS BEING EXPANDED to the balance of the area, the top of the hill and the swimming pool area.

To allow for the addition of poisons at the playing fields, the MDC spent money creating a drainage system to drain off poisons which should not be used in the first place.

Your latest destruction includes another expensive drainage system to drain off the added use of poisons.

But the contractors love it.  They are paid to create drainage for poisons which were not needed in the 20th Century and which should not be used now, but they are very happy, and the contractor lobby loves to show up for meetings praising an incompetent management team.

9. My detailed analysis on the view of October 19.

Following is a direct copy of my blog report on the October 19, site review.  The negative comments are fully made part of this analysis.

Please note that the preceding analysis has attempted to minimize duplication of these comments.

V. Link to blog post appended in whole to DCR communication following the above.

The blog post which was appended to the end may be read at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/charles-river-spot-report-tour-of.html.