Bob La Trémouille reports:
1. Introduction — Fresh Pond.
2. Karen Parker concerning Fresh Pond.
3. Request to Use.
4. Glowing authorization with additions.
1. Introduction — Fresh Pond.
We have stated any number of times that the outrages on the Charles River are anything but unusual with regard to the City of Cambridge. Another excellent example is the wild areas at Fresh Pond in West Cambridge. The City of Cambridge is destroying thousands of healthy trees to put in saplings.
And they get state subsidies for this outrage as a part of which they neglect to tell the state about the needless destruction.
2. Karen Parker concerning Fresh Pond.
I was just riding at Fresh Pond on my bicycle.
I saw the work they are doing there, although they are putting some nice plants in that are pretty to look at. I asked some passerbys what they thought about all of the work, did they think it was good or bad, and they said, bad, because they are destroying the natural plants and they are not native the stuff they are putting in now.
I said, thank you and I agree, I will tell my friends.
Too bad, I did not have a flyer with me to pass along.
Just wanted you to know.
3. Request to Use.
You normally say it is ok to quote you.
I would be pleased to post this on the blog.
Thank you.
4. Glowing authorization with additions.
Its never a problem, if it were I would let you know. I figured everyone would be glad to hear this.
The other thing is I mentioned the plants they put at Charles River keep dying and they will at Fresh Pond probably.
The people agreed. They said they didn't like the change at Fresh Pond.
You can copy all of this.
Karen
Monday, August 27, 2007
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Most of Show on Cambridge's Jim Crow Attack is on the web
Bob La Trémouille reports:
Roy Bercaw has been kind enough to post two more segments from Kathy Podgers' August 12, 2007 appearance on The Cambridge Environment.
I have not been able to review these in detail. However, clearly these segments include the first portion and the last portion of the show. I will amend our links to place the links in the proper order. These clips are edited, and are not the complete show.
Thanks Roy.
First segment: http://tinyurl.com/2wgzzx.
Final segment: http://tinyurl.com/2m7c29.
Cambridge, MA, has a terrible city government which spends a lot of time saying false things about itself.
Roy Bercaw has been kind enough to post two more segments from Kathy Podgers' August 12, 2007 appearance on The Cambridge Environment.
I have not been able to review these in detail. However, clearly these segments include the first portion and the last portion of the show. I will amend our links to place the links in the proper order. These clips are edited, and are not the complete show.
Thanks Roy.
First segment: http://tinyurl.com/2wgzzx.
Final segment: http://tinyurl.com/2m7c29.
Cambridge, MA, has a terrible city government which spends a lot of time saying false things about itself.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Letter to the Boston Globe about Mirant-Kendall power plant and the algae blooms
This letter from Marilyn Wellons responds to an editorial in the Boston Globe that managed to discuss the algae bloom without mentioning Ebersol Fields' contribution to the phenomenon.
Among other reasons, since it is over the Globe's 200-word limit for letters, it may not be published.
To the Editor:
Your editorial on the Charles, “A river system in hot water” (August 13, 2007), oddly subsumes a major factor in the 2006 and 2007 algae blooms under the rubric of “runoffs from nutrient-rich fertilized lawns.”
It’s no secret that runoff from 6 acres of commercial sod, installed in the spring of 2006 at “Teddy Ebersol’s Red Sox Fields at Lederman Park,” have fed the algae and disrupted the river’s chemistry. These DCR fields by Mass General Hospital are directly opposite the Mirant-Kendall power plant in Cambridge, where other pollutants collect before discharge into Boston Harbor.
While you hesitate to ascribe full responsibility for the algae blooms to Mirant-Kendall, you omit this other, critical piece of the puzzle. Mirant-Kendall ran at an even higher capacity in August, 2005, but there was no explosion of algae. A year later, in August, 2006, your paper quoted a water quality scientist as saying of the astronomical counts, “We’ve never seen an algae bloom like this before.” (“Toxic algae levels feared in lower Charles River,” August 16, 2006, p. A1.) There had never been those 6 acres of commercial sod at the river’s mouth, either.
Boaters could smell the fertilizer offshore from the fields all last summer. Other chemicals applied to the 6 acres also disrupted the river’s chemistry. In July, 2006, Ebersol Fields developed a fungus, as is common with overwatered, fertilized turf. The DCR asked for and received permission to apply “Tartan,” a fungicide, to the entire 6 acres, to provide the “quality of turf our players deserve.” (Boston Conservation Commission hearing, August 2, 2006.)
The label for “Tartan” warns against its use near water. (“Toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Do not apply directly to water, to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas . . . . Drift and runoff from treated areas may be hazardous to fish/aquatic organisms in adjacent sites. . . Do not apply when weather conditions favor runoff or drift.” Material Safety Data Sheet, attachment to DCR Request for Determination of Applicability, July 19, 2006.)
The first application was August 10-11, the second, September 1. The DCR supplemented the two treatments with “field fertilization” and irrigation.” (Memo, July 19, 2006, Stephen D. Brown, DCR Project Manager, to Boston Conservation Commission.) The algae count exploded after the first treatment, then dropped toward the end of August. After the second, the count climbed again.
Taxpayers in the Charles River watershed have spent $60 million to clean up the river for swimming. By 2013 we will have spent $19 million more. Now Cambridge is paying $1.5 million to pollute the river. It will install 7 acres of commercial sod at the DCR’s Magazine Beach this summer, to repeat the blunder at Ebersol Fields and make swimming impossible there. Since the project’s puddle, billed as a “wetland” and far upriver from Mirant-Kendall, has already had an algae bloom this summer, we can expect really spectacular Cyanobacteria once the fields go in.
Among other reasons, since it is over the Globe's 200-word limit for letters, it may not be published.
To the Editor:
Your editorial on the Charles, “A river system in hot water” (August 13, 2007), oddly subsumes a major factor in the 2006 and 2007 algae blooms under the rubric of “runoffs from nutrient-rich fertilized lawns.”
It’s no secret that runoff from 6 acres of commercial sod, installed in the spring of 2006 at “Teddy Ebersol’s Red Sox Fields at Lederman Park,” have fed the algae and disrupted the river’s chemistry. These DCR fields by Mass General Hospital are directly opposite the Mirant-Kendall power plant in Cambridge, where other pollutants collect before discharge into Boston Harbor.
While you hesitate to ascribe full responsibility for the algae blooms to Mirant-Kendall, you omit this other, critical piece of the puzzle. Mirant-Kendall ran at an even higher capacity in August, 2005, but there was no explosion of algae. A year later, in August, 2006, your paper quoted a water quality scientist as saying of the astronomical counts, “We’ve never seen an algae bloom like this before.” (“Toxic algae levels feared in lower Charles River,” August 16, 2006, p. A1.) There had never been those 6 acres of commercial sod at the river’s mouth, either.
Boaters could smell the fertilizer offshore from the fields all last summer. Other chemicals applied to the 6 acres also disrupted the river’s chemistry. In July, 2006, Ebersol Fields developed a fungus, as is common with overwatered, fertilized turf. The DCR asked for and received permission to apply “Tartan,” a fungicide, to the entire 6 acres, to provide the “quality of turf our players deserve.” (Boston Conservation Commission hearing, August 2, 2006.)
The label for “Tartan” warns against its use near water. (“Toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Do not apply directly to water, to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas . . . . Drift and runoff from treated areas may be hazardous to fish/aquatic organisms in adjacent sites. . . Do not apply when weather conditions favor runoff or drift.” Material Safety Data Sheet, attachment to DCR Request for Determination of Applicability, July 19, 2006.)
The first application was August 10-11, the second, September 1. The DCR supplemented the two treatments with “field fertilization” and irrigation.” (Memo, July 19, 2006, Stephen D. Brown, DCR Project Manager, to Boston Conservation Commission.) The algae count exploded after the first treatment, then dropped toward the end of August. After the second, the count climbed again.
Taxpayers in the Charles River watershed have spent $60 million to clean up the river for swimming. By 2013 we will have spent $19 million more. Now Cambridge is paying $1.5 million to pollute the river. It will install 7 acres of commercial sod at the DCR’s Magazine Beach this summer, to repeat the blunder at Ebersol Fields and make swimming impossible there. Since the project’s puddle, billed as a “wetland” and far upriver from Mirant-Kendall, has already had an algae bloom this summer, we can expect really spectacular Cyanobacteria once the fields go in.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Video on Jim Crow attack, August 4, 2007, Cambridge, MA
Bob La Trémouille reports:
I have now done two posts on the apparent police abuse of Kathy Podgers because she had the nerve to expect Cambridge, MA to obey federal civil rights law.
I have also had Kathy on my Cambridge, MA Cable Show, The Cambridge Environment, twice concerning this matter. The first was on the day after the attack, Sunday, August 5. The second was Sunday, August 12.
The second show was taped by Roy Bercaw and a key part posted on his blog. He has been kind enough to provide a link, it is: http://tinyurl.com/338had. I have also posted the link in the active links to this blog.
I have now done two posts on the apparent police abuse of Kathy Podgers because she had the nerve to expect Cambridge, MA to obey federal civil rights law.
I have also had Kathy on my Cambridge, MA Cable Show, The Cambridge Environment, twice concerning this matter. The first was on the day after the attack, Sunday, August 5. The second was Sunday, August 12.
The second show was taped by Roy Bercaw and a key part posted on his blog. He has been kind enough to provide a link, it is: http://tinyurl.com/338had. I have also posted the link in the active links to this blog.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Comments on Police Brutality, Cambridge, MA USA
Bob La Trémouille edits:
1. Joe, 8/6.
2. Kathy, 8/9 - A sick and cowardly act of brutal terror.
3. Bob, 8/12.
The following respond to our report of August 6, 2007, "Cambridge Woman Alleges Abuse by Cambridge Police in Cambridge Police Station Because of her Handicap."
1. Joe, 8/6.
Every day I get more and more frustrated with this City's management, politicians and upper echelon officials and how they thumb their noses at the public they are supposed to serve. It seems that every year, for the past decade, it's been nothing but getting worse and worse.
2. Kathy, 8/9 - A sick and cowardly act of brutal terror.
August 9, 2007.
The vicious attack on my service dog, Shannon, was a sick and cowardly act of brutal terror. Shannon lay crying on the floor, attached to me by a 2 1/2 foot lead. She did not fight back, as per her training, as I would have been seriously injured. She was brave and true.
None of the police present did anything to protect Shannon nor myself.
I am 64 years old, sick and totally disabled.
Also, I have just received notice that my MCAD complaint vs. CVS for discrimination based on I entered the store accompanied by my service dog was dismissed based upon police perjury, false police reports, and the refusal of the police to accept internal complain, more perjury, and 3 other laws were violated by police, including my civil rights.
BTW, Is there not a law that makes it a crime to provide false statements in a civil rights investigation?
Take care folks
this will be over when it's over
Your neighbour
Kathy
3. Bob, 8/12.
A young woman has been raped and murdered on the Charles River as part of the ongoing problems there. The rapist/murderer had good reason through silence and through their/their friends mistreatment of the Charles River White Geese to think that he was implementing the policies of the City of Cambridge / Department of Conservation and Recreation as he killed nesting geese. He then graduated.
The City of Cambridge, along with the Department of Conservation and Recreation is aggressively moving the environmental approach to the Charles River into the 19th Century. The DCR brags about it as explanation for their pending (with Cambridge blessing) destruction of hundreds of mature trees.
The City of Cambridge is aggressively now in the company of the 50's and 60's South in the realm of civil rights.
The City of Cambridge PUBLICLY calls itself above federal civil rights law. The City of Cambridge in its attack on Kathy Podgers having her guide dog at a Cambridge City Council meeting PUBLICLY confronted her individually.
The City of Cambridge with this apparently clear abuse of Kathy through her guide dog, BY A ROGUE COP IN A ROOM FULL OF SILENTLY COMPLICENT "POLICE OFFICERS", has removed the most important distinction between Cambridge, MA, 2007, and the South in the 50's and 60's.
Will we hear that this also "did not happen"?
Will Cambridge change its stripes and start behaving like the city it claims to be?
1. Joe, 8/6.
2. Kathy, 8/9 - A sick and cowardly act of brutal terror.
3. Bob, 8/12.
The following respond to our report of August 6, 2007, "Cambridge Woman Alleges Abuse by Cambridge Police in Cambridge Police Station Because of her Handicap."
1. Joe, 8/6.
Every day I get more and more frustrated with this City's management, politicians and upper echelon officials and how they thumb their noses at the public they are supposed to serve. It seems that every year, for the past decade, it's been nothing but getting worse and worse.
2. Kathy, 8/9 - A sick and cowardly act of brutal terror.
August 9, 2007.
The vicious attack on my service dog, Shannon, was a sick and cowardly act of brutal terror. Shannon lay crying on the floor, attached to me by a 2 1/2 foot lead. She did not fight back, as per her training, as I would have been seriously injured. She was brave and true.
None of the police present did anything to protect Shannon nor myself.
I am 64 years old, sick and totally disabled.
Also, I have just received notice that my MCAD complaint vs. CVS for discrimination based on I entered the store accompanied by my service dog was dismissed based upon police perjury, false police reports, and the refusal of the police to accept internal complain, more perjury, and 3 other laws were violated by police, including my civil rights.
BTW, Is there not a law that makes it a crime to provide false statements in a civil rights investigation?
Take care folks
this will be over when it's over
Your neighbour
Kathy
3. Bob, 8/12.
A young woman has been raped and murdered on the Charles River as part of the ongoing problems there. The rapist/murderer had good reason through silence and through their/their friends mistreatment of the Charles River White Geese to think that he was implementing the policies of the City of Cambridge / Department of Conservation and Recreation as he killed nesting geese. He then graduated.
The City of Cambridge, along with the Department of Conservation and Recreation is aggressively moving the environmental approach to the Charles River into the 19th Century. The DCR brags about it as explanation for their pending (with Cambridge blessing) destruction of hundreds of mature trees.
The City of Cambridge is aggressively now in the company of the 50's and 60's South in the realm of civil rights.
The City of Cambridge PUBLICLY calls itself above federal civil rights law. The City of Cambridge in its attack on Kathy Podgers having her guide dog at a Cambridge City Council meeting PUBLICLY confronted her individually.
The City of Cambridge with this apparently clear abuse of Kathy through her guide dog, BY A ROGUE COP IN A ROOM FULL OF SILENTLY COMPLICENT "POLICE OFFICERS", has removed the most important distinction between Cambridge, MA, 2007, and the South in the 50's and 60's.
Will we hear that this also "did not happen"?
Will Cambridge change its stripes and start behaving like the city it claims to be?
Monday, August 06, 2007
Cambridge Woman Alleges Abuse by Cambridge Police in Cambridge Police Station Because of her Handicap
Bob La Trémouille reports:
Kathy Podgers has a long standing “disagreement” with the City of Cambridge and its police department over her guide dog. Kathy has the odd impression that the City of Cambridge should be obeying and enforcing Federal laws on the matter. Cambridge considers Cambridge’s local ordinance more important than federal law.
Federal law, according to Kathy, gives her a right to have her guide dog accompany her in public places to assist her because of neurological problems. The City of Cambridge’s local ordinance does not give her that right and Cambridge is downright offended that Kathy would expect Cambridge to obey and respect federal laws.
The confrontations with city officials over Kathy’s use of the guide dog have been quite public including one situation in a meeting of the Cambridge City Council in which the chair tried to evict Kathy from the room because of the presence of her guide dog.
Saturday morning, August 4, Kathy was at the main lobby of the Cambridge Police Station reviewing complaint files because of public distress at difficulties getting the Cambridge Police to accept citizen complaints.
Kathy says that a police officer opened a door between the main lobby and the police area. Kathy says that a pit bull came through that door and immediately latched onto her dog’s leg.
Not only did the officer with the dog fail to defend Kathy’s dog, the officer expressed lack of concern about the matter. The “police officer” finally removed the dog from her dog by picking up the pit bull with the guide dog’s leg still in the pit bull’s mouth. The pit bull was finally removed with added pain to the guide dog.
At no time did the guide dog do anything to defend itself, in accordance with its training.
Kathy thinks the police were trying to goad her dog into self defense so that they could charge her dog as the aggressor. Police refused to take a complaint on the attack. Police stated no harm because the pit bull had no teeth.
An animal control office was called. The animal control officer demanded to see the guide dog’s papers. The police refused to provide to Kathy the relevant papers on the pit bull, and, to Kathy’s knowledge, no demand for papers was made by the animal control officer on the police.
The guide dog was treated at Angell Memorial Hospital. Kathy was treated at Mass. General. All medical personnel expressed distress at the behavior of the Cambridge Police and the refusal by the Cambridge Police to obey minimal paper exchange requirements.
Kathy Podgers may be contacted at 617-642-3154. Your reporter has no personal knowledge of the incident on Saturday morning.
Kathy Podgers has a long standing “disagreement” with the City of Cambridge and its police department over her guide dog. Kathy has the odd impression that the City of Cambridge should be obeying and enforcing Federal laws on the matter. Cambridge considers Cambridge’s local ordinance more important than federal law.
Federal law, according to Kathy, gives her a right to have her guide dog accompany her in public places to assist her because of neurological problems. The City of Cambridge’s local ordinance does not give her that right and Cambridge is downright offended that Kathy would expect Cambridge to obey and respect federal laws.
The confrontations with city officials over Kathy’s use of the guide dog have been quite public including one situation in a meeting of the Cambridge City Council in which the chair tried to evict Kathy from the room because of the presence of her guide dog.
Saturday morning, August 4, Kathy was at the main lobby of the Cambridge Police Station reviewing complaint files because of public distress at difficulties getting the Cambridge Police to accept citizen complaints.
Kathy says that a police officer opened a door between the main lobby and the police area. Kathy says that a pit bull came through that door and immediately latched onto her dog’s leg.
Not only did the officer with the dog fail to defend Kathy’s dog, the officer expressed lack of concern about the matter. The “police officer” finally removed the dog from her dog by picking up the pit bull with the guide dog’s leg still in the pit bull’s mouth. The pit bull was finally removed with added pain to the guide dog.
At no time did the guide dog do anything to defend itself, in accordance with its training.
Kathy thinks the police were trying to goad her dog into self defense so that they could charge her dog as the aggressor. Police refused to take a complaint on the attack. Police stated no harm because the pit bull had no teeth.
An animal control office was called. The animal control officer demanded to see the guide dog’s papers. The police refused to provide to Kathy the relevant papers on the pit bull, and, to Kathy’s knowledge, no demand for papers was made by the animal control officer on the police.
The guide dog was treated at Angell Memorial Hospital. Kathy was treated at Mass. General. All medical personnel expressed distress at the behavior of the Cambridge Police and the refusal by the Cambridge Police to obey minimal paper exchange requirements.
Kathy Podgers may be contacted at 617-642-3154. Your reporter has no personal knowledge of the incident on Saturday morning.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Visibilities 356-362 at the Goose Meadow of the Charles River White Geese — Cambridge City Council Pushes Governor
Bob La Trémouille reports:
1, Visibilities 356-362.
2. Cambridge City Council Pushes Governor.
A. Marilyn’s Letter to the Cambridge Chronicle.
B. Charles River Conservancy director only supporter.
C. Summary.
3. Marilyn Responds on Commuter Comments.
4. Ed: The hunt for food forced on the Charles River White Geese.
5. Marilyn Responds on the Charles River Conservancy.
1. Visibilities 356-362.
Monday, July 23 (356), Tuesday, July 24 (357), Wednesday, July 25 (358), Thursday, July 26 (359), Friday, July 27 (360), Tuesday, July 31 (361) and Wednesday, August 1 (362), Marilyn did visibilities at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. The visibility on August 1 started at the BU Bridge and moved to the nearby City of Cambridge ball field.
Her response, as usual was excellent.
Marilyn reports:
Lots of people are taking the flyers, and I get thumbs-up signs and waves.
[ed: The latter come from passing motorists. The visibility location takes on a love-in type of thing based on the general love of the commuters for the Charles River White Geese and for the Charles River. This love is recognized by the Cambridge and state pols and bureaucrats. That love is exactly the reason for the repeated flat out lies.]
2. Cambridge City Council Pushes Governor.
The evening of July 28, Marilyn and Kathy Podgers responded at Cambridge City Council to a motion from the Cambridge City Council asking the governor the status of the next stage of environment destruction at Magazine Beach funded by the Cambridge City Council.
A. Marilyn’s Letter to the Cambridge Chronicle.
Marilyn did an excellent job of summarizing her position on the Cambridge City Council’s funding of environmental destruction at Magazine Beach in a letter printed in the Cambridge City Council today, August 2, 2007.
It read as follows:
********
David Harris, Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
To the Editor:
Your otherwise excellent article and editorial on the First Annual Charles River Swim Race failed to mention the cause of last summer’s unprecedented, astronomical algae bloom: 6 acres of commercial sod installed in the spring of 2006 at the Ebersol Fields at Lederman Park, by Mass General Hospital in Boston. “We’ve never seen an algae bloom like this before,” one water quality scientist was quoted as saying. There had never been those 6 acres of commercial sod at the river’s mouth, either.
The matter is especially important for the Chronicle’s readers, since our city is poised to install 7 acres of the same sod at Magazine Beach.
At Ebersol Fields, the DCR replaced existing ball fields with professional-level ones, to provide “the quality of turf our players deserve,” as a DCR spokesperson put it.
In the river offshore from those 6 acres before they became "professional level," water quality was B+ in August, 2005. A year later, in August, 2006, the river was dead from the Museum of Science dam to the Mass. Avenue Bridge. Runoff from those 6 acres’ fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, and fungicide created a major public health hazard for humans and wildlife.
Taxpayers in the Charles River watershed have spent $60 million so far to clean up the river. We’ll spend another $19 million by 2013, without factoring in the algae. Taxpayers in Cambridge — where water rates continue to rise — are about to pay $1.5 million to pollute the river at Magazine Beach and make swimming impossible. The joint Cambridge-DCR “restoration” at Magazine Beach, even before the 7 polluting acres, has already caused an algae bloom in the puddle installed as there as “wetlands”
In this election year, it would be interesting to hear candidates’ justifications for the project. Our City Council has approved it and given the Governor the funds to proceed. With wisdom and enough calls from the public, he will think twice about water quality and withhold the funds.
I’m hoping to read all about it in the Chronicle.
B. Charles River Conservancy director only supporter.
Mr. Rob Johnson, a director of the Charles River Conservancy, was the only person, including members of the Cambridge City Council, who spoke in favor of the Magazine Beach project.
Mr. Johnson was a leader of the predecessor organization to the Charles River Conservancy, the “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
One of the first things that Friends of the White Geese did after organizing was to demonstrate at a supposed environmentally favorable project by “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
The Friends of the White Geese demonstration was in opposition to the destruction of the Goose Meadow a few months, and to the balance of these people’s destructive plans which include but very much are not limited to:
(1) The wall of designer bushes which has replaced the wetlands at Magazine Beach and should be removed; and
(2) The current proposal to poison Magazine Beach and the Charles River.
Not long after our demonstration against the "Friends of Magazine Beach," the "Friends of Magazine Beach" for all practical purposes disappeared and, Da Da, we had the Charles River Conservancy, which included directors of the "Friends of Magazine Beach."
The Charles River Conservancy conducted a “swim in” at this project in 2005, the year after they, the City of Cambridge and the state pols and bureaucrats, destroyed the wetlands and started to starve the Charles River White Geese.
The CRC claimed that this batch of stuff would assist swimming in the Charles.
A quick view of the wall of designer bushes now blocking access between Magazine Beach and the Charles River readily shows just how much of a flat out lie the "swim in" was.
The poisons that nine city councilors and their pol and bureaucrat buddies are poised to introduce once again demonstrate just how much the CRC (and their pols and bureaucrats) lack credibility.
The CRC has run around for the past five years poisoning the eggs of water fowl on the Charles River. For the same period, they have run around destroying more and more protective vegetation on the Charles River needed by migrating birds such as cranes.
For one of the directors of the CRC to be the only public supporter of poisoning Magazine Beach and the Charles River, says a lot about the project at Magazine Beach and about this developer funded group.
The only person standing in the way of this continuing outrage is Deval Patrick, Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
C. Summary.
Is Governor Patrick on the side of our world or on the side of the destroyers of our world? The latter group includes NINE Cambridge City Councilors, and the Cambridge and state pols and bureaucrats.
There is a very major difference between reality and the repeated lies of the destroyers.
3. Marilyn Responds on Commuter Comments.
Motorists and passers-by are very concerned about the White Geese's trips across the road to get to the grass.
I always point out that the geese can no longer get to their primary sources of food, the grass at Magazine Beach and on the river by the Hyatt. Since 2004 the White Geese have been confined to their nesting area, now their ghetto, by the Cambridge and DCR projects in both places. They cross the road now because they have to--and didn't for 20 years previous to the joint Cambridge-DCR starvation campaign.
Then people ask why the DCR and Cambridge would do that. I mention the cover story, that the White Geese are said to be "not a native species." We all know that humans are "native" to Africa only, but apparently humans are exempt from this stringent standard for living on and around the Charles River.
4. Ed: The hunt for food forced on the Charles River White Geese.
The Charles River White Geese frequently commute from their Goose Meadow to grass located under Memorial Drive. This was extremely difficult before the first attack on the Charles River White Geese, by Boston University acting on behalf of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. In October 1999, BU removed sections of fence which kept the Goose Meadow safe from people at the same time that BU destroyed the goose meadow.
Since the starvation campaign was commenced in September 2005 by nine heartless Cambridge City Councilors and by their pols and bureaucrats at state and local level, the Charles River White Geese have hunted for food wherever they can find it.
Their search for food includes a dangerous walk across the on ramp to Memorial Drive from the BU Bridge. This on ramp constitutes the northern boundary of the goose meadow.
The Charles River White Geese are extremely cautious pedestrians, especially given their lack of formal education in traffic laws. The Charles River White Geese will stand on the sidewalk next to the on ramp. They will look and look and look until they think it is safe to cross. Trouble is that, after all that cautious looking, they cross the on ramp like a bunch of geese. They walk with very little speed. Many of them will wander all about in the process of crossing the on ramp.
I have frequently seen commuters patiently watching their progress with admiration for their individual beauty and determination. Many will get out of their cars and take photos. I have never seen drivers treat these travels with lack of respect.
5. Marilyn Responds on the Charles River Conservancy.
Robb Johnson was the only person who spoke in favor of
the MB scandal. Remember too that his Friends of
Magazine Beach organized the annual volunteer cleanups
of Magazine Beach a week or two before BU's graduation
ceremony there--without telling the volunteers they
were subsidizing BU as well as the DCR.
When we pointed out the timing, FOMB rescheduled the
next cleanup for after the graduation and then
dissolved, discontinuing them altogether.
His organization was the one the DCR solicited the
anti-White Geese memo from. When I followed up on
their statements about the White Geese, I found the
people they quoted disavowed what the memo attributed
to them. In fact, one official has been completely
misrespresented.
While Johnson was speaking about the plan for Magazine
Beach he favored, Kathy Podgers pointed out to me that
his organization approved the plans in secret, that in
subsequent public meetings people told the DCR the
plans didn't do what they had wanted done--clean up
the pool and fix the old stone building at Captain's
Island made from granite in the original magazine.
As it is, the plans Johnson and the DCR are pushing
will do away with the turnout and parking at the
swimming pool. Everyone I talk to about that says
it's not only crazy, but should be stopped.
1, Visibilities 356-362.
2. Cambridge City Council Pushes Governor.
A. Marilyn’s Letter to the Cambridge Chronicle.
B. Charles River Conservancy director only supporter.
C. Summary.
3. Marilyn Responds on Commuter Comments.
4. Ed: The hunt for food forced on the Charles River White Geese.
5. Marilyn Responds on the Charles River Conservancy.
1. Visibilities 356-362.
Monday, July 23 (356), Tuesday, July 24 (357), Wednesday, July 25 (358), Thursday, July 26 (359), Friday, July 27 (360), Tuesday, July 31 (361) and Wednesday, August 1 (362), Marilyn did visibilities at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. The visibility on August 1 started at the BU Bridge and moved to the nearby City of Cambridge ball field.
Her response, as usual was excellent.
Marilyn reports:
Lots of people are taking the flyers, and I get thumbs-up signs and waves.
[ed: The latter come from passing motorists. The visibility location takes on a love-in type of thing based on the general love of the commuters for the Charles River White Geese and for the Charles River. This love is recognized by the Cambridge and state pols and bureaucrats. That love is exactly the reason for the repeated flat out lies.]
2. Cambridge City Council Pushes Governor.
The evening of July 28, Marilyn and Kathy Podgers responded at Cambridge City Council to a motion from the Cambridge City Council asking the governor the status of the next stage of environment destruction at Magazine Beach funded by the Cambridge City Council.
A. Marilyn’s Letter to the Cambridge Chronicle.
Marilyn did an excellent job of summarizing her position on the Cambridge City Council’s funding of environmental destruction at Magazine Beach in a letter printed in the Cambridge City Council today, August 2, 2007.
It read as follows:
********
David Harris, Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
To the Editor:
Your otherwise excellent article and editorial on the First Annual Charles River Swim Race failed to mention the cause of last summer’s unprecedented, astronomical algae bloom: 6 acres of commercial sod installed in the spring of 2006 at the Ebersol Fields at Lederman Park, by Mass General Hospital in Boston. “We’ve never seen an algae bloom like this before,” one water quality scientist was quoted as saying. There had never been those 6 acres of commercial sod at the river’s mouth, either.
The matter is especially important for the Chronicle’s readers, since our city is poised to install 7 acres of the same sod at Magazine Beach.
At Ebersol Fields, the DCR replaced existing ball fields with professional-level ones, to provide “the quality of turf our players deserve,” as a DCR spokesperson put it.
In the river offshore from those 6 acres before they became "professional level," water quality was B+ in August, 2005. A year later, in August, 2006, the river was dead from the Museum of Science dam to the Mass. Avenue Bridge. Runoff from those 6 acres’ fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, and fungicide created a major public health hazard for humans and wildlife.
Taxpayers in the Charles River watershed have spent $60 million so far to clean up the river. We’ll spend another $19 million by 2013, without factoring in the algae. Taxpayers in Cambridge — where water rates continue to rise — are about to pay $1.5 million to pollute the river at Magazine Beach and make swimming impossible. The joint Cambridge-DCR “restoration” at Magazine Beach, even before the 7 polluting acres, has already caused an algae bloom in the puddle installed as there as “wetlands”
In this election year, it would be interesting to hear candidates’ justifications for the project. Our City Council has approved it and given the Governor the funds to proceed. With wisdom and enough calls from the public, he will think twice about water quality and withhold the funds.
I’m hoping to read all about it in the Chronicle.
B. Charles River Conservancy director only supporter.
Mr. Rob Johnson, a director of the Charles River Conservancy, was the only person, including members of the Cambridge City Council, who spoke in favor of the Magazine Beach project.
Mr. Johnson was a leader of the predecessor organization to the Charles River Conservancy, the “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
One of the first things that Friends of the White Geese did after organizing was to demonstrate at a supposed environmentally favorable project by “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
The Friends of the White Geese demonstration was in opposition to the destruction of the Goose Meadow a few months, and to the balance of these people’s destructive plans which include but very much are not limited to:
(1) The wall of designer bushes which has replaced the wetlands at Magazine Beach and should be removed; and
(2) The current proposal to poison Magazine Beach and the Charles River.
Not long after our demonstration against the "Friends of Magazine Beach," the "Friends of Magazine Beach" for all practical purposes disappeared and, Da Da, we had the Charles River Conservancy, which included directors of the "Friends of Magazine Beach."
The Charles River Conservancy conducted a “swim in” at this project in 2005, the year after they, the City of Cambridge and the state pols and bureaucrats, destroyed the wetlands and started to starve the Charles River White Geese.
The CRC claimed that this batch of stuff would assist swimming in the Charles.
A quick view of the wall of designer bushes now blocking access between Magazine Beach and the Charles River readily shows just how much of a flat out lie the "swim in" was.
The poisons that nine city councilors and their pol and bureaucrat buddies are poised to introduce once again demonstrate just how much the CRC (and their pols and bureaucrats) lack credibility.
The CRC has run around for the past five years poisoning the eggs of water fowl on the Charles River. For the same period, they have run around destroying more and more protective vegetation on the Charles River needed by migrating birds such as cranes.
For one of the directors of the CRC to be the only public supporter of poisoning Magazine Beach and the Charles River, says a lot about the project at Magazine Beach and about this developer funded group.
The only person standing in the way of this continuing outrage is Deval Patrick, Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
C. Summary.
Is Governor Patrick on the side of our world or on the side of the destroyers of our world? The latter group includes NINE Cambridge City Councilors, and the Cambridge and state pols and bureaucrats.
There is a very major difference between reality and the repeated lies of the destroyers.
3. Marilyn Responds on Commuter Comments.
Motorists and passers-by are very concerned about the White Geese's trips across the road to get to the grass.
I always point out that the geese can no longer get to their primary sources of food, the grass at Magazine Beach and on the river by the Hyatt. Since 2004 the White Geese have been confined to their nesting area, now their ghetto, by the Cambridge and DCR projects in both places. They cross the road now because they have to--and didn't for 20 years previous to the joint Cambridge-DCR starvation campaign.
Then people ask why the DCR and Cambridge would do that. I mention the cover story, that the White Geese are said to be "not a native species." We all know that humans are "native" to Africa only, but apparently humans are exempt from this stringent standard for living on and around the Charles River.
4. Ed: The hunt for food forced on the Charles River White Geese.
The Charles River White Geese frequently commute from their Goose Meadow to grass located under Memorial Drive. This was extremely difficult before the first attack on the Charles River White Geese, by Boston University acting on behalf of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. In October 1999, BU removed sections of fence which kept the Goose Meadow safe from people at the same time that BU destroyed the goose meadow.
Since the starvation campaign was commenced in September 2005 by nine heartless Cambridge City Councilors and by their pols and bureaucrats at state and local level, the Charles River White Geese have hunted for food wherever they can find it.
Their search for food includes a dangerous walk across the on ramp to Memorial Drive from the BU Bridge. This on ramp constitutes the northern boundary of the goose meadow.
The Charles River White Geese are extremely cautious pedestrians, especially given their lack of formal education in traffic laws. The Charles River White Geese will stand on the sidewalk next to the on ramp. They will look and look and look until they think it is safe to cross. Trouble is that, after all that cautious looking, they cross the on ramp like a bunch of geese. They walk with very little speed. Many of them will wander all about in the process of crossing the on ramp.
I have frequently seen commuters patiently watching their progress with admiration for their individual beauty and determination. Many will get out of their cars and take photos. I have never seen drivers treat these travels with lack of respect.
5. Marilyn Responds on the Charles River Conservancy.
Robb Johnson was the only person who spoke in favor of
the MB scandal. Remember too that his Friends of
Magazine Beach organized the annual volunteer cleanups
of Magazine Beach a week or two before BU's graduation
ceremony there--without telling the volunteers they
were subsidizing BU as well as the DCR.
When we pointed out the timing, FOMB rescheduled the
next cleanup for after the graduation and then
dissolved, discontinuing them altogether.
His organization was the one the DCR solicited the
anti-White Geese memo from. When I followed up on
their statements about the White Geese, I found the
people they quoted disavowed what the memo attributed
to them. In fact, one official has been completely
misrespresented.
While Johnson was speaking about the plan for Magazine
Beach he favored, Kathy Podgers pointed out to me that
his organization approved the plans in secret, that in
subsequent public meetings people told the DCR the
plans didn't do what they had wanted done--clean up
the pool and fix the old stone building at Captain's
Island made from granite in the original magazine.
As it is, the plans Johnson and the DCR are pushing
will do away with the turnout and parking at the
swimming pool. Everyone I talk to about that says
it's not only crazy, but should be stopped.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)