1. Introduction.
2. Marilyn's Response.
3. Kathy Podgers' comment.
4. Update, March 26, 2009.
a. Marilyn printing.
b. Well intended but back-stabbed letter on Alewife not published in hard copy.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Introduction.
The Cambridge Chronicle seems to be getting better at weeding out misleading communications.
The very destructive Charles River Conservancy put out a press release praising itself concerning swimming in the Charles River.
This was printed by the Chronicle on line, but does not seem to have been printed in last week's (March 19, 2009) Cambridge Chronicle.
One of the City Manager's groups announced that the press release was going to be in that edition of the Chronicle. Marilyn Wellons sent in a response, which is now posted by the Chronicle at http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/opinions/x1331540183/Letter-Swimming-in-the-Charles-is-bait.
2. Marilyn's Response.
Her response reads:
“Swimming in the Charles” is the bait repeatedly offered by the Charles River Conservancy to mobilize support for whatever “restoration” or “enhancement” of riverfront parkland the Department of Conservation and Recreation and Cambridge are offering at the moment. Now, as Cambridge prepares to replace grass adapted to the riverfront at the DCR’s Magazine Beach with commercial sod, an irrigation system, fences and chemical maintenance, we see the bait once more.
Once again people are invited to connect their hopes for safe swimming to what is, in fact, further destruction of the environment. To swim safely in the river at Magazine Beach, the DCR, Cambridge, the CRC, or any other entity with money would have to build an entire swimming pool, complete with filtration system, and sink it in the river. Sediment with heavy metals, not any poop from waterfowl, is the toxic element here.
The fields Cambridge and the DCR are installing must be chemically maintained and their use restricted, as Cambridge intends, to keep the “quality of turf our players deserve,” in the words of a DCR official defending the use of herbicides at the DCR’s Ebersol Fields, also on the Charles.
In correspondence with elected officials, the DCR has said only it never “intends” to use chemicals. It uses them anyway, when “needed.” Algae blooms fed by the chemical runoff from Ebersol Fields near MGH in Boston forced the cancellation of the Charles River swim in 2006. Since then, the CRC has been forced to move the event ever earlier, from September to June, to avoid the now inevitable toxic bloom just offshore.
Maintenance of the commercial sod at Magazine Beach will apparently be at the discretion of Cambridge officials. They make noises about “integrated pest management,” a euphemism for continued use of pesticides and other chemicals. Children and wildlife alike need no exposure to these toxins courtesy of our city or the DCR.
This bait invites “environmentalists” to weigh in once again with misinformation against waterfowl, who legitimately belong on the river (if not on a river, where?) and to dismiss those of us who actually enjoy contact with the natural world, including geese.
As for any “organic” care of lawn grasses, why are these “environmentalists” not celebrating the nitrogen, naturally applied by geese, to riverfront meadows?
3. Kathy Podgers' comment.
Kathy Podgers offers the following comment:
Thanks for posting this. Marilyn's letter is special, especially considering all the hours she has put into attending numerous meetings by half a dozen "official" organizations. I appreciate her knowledge and advocacy on this issue, and count her a true friend to Cambridge neighbors, as well as a fount of knowledge.
We have collected some 500 signatures to end the folly at Magazine Beach, which is rightfully called Captain's Island, and I hope you can all join us to end the further destruction of one of Cambridge's precious natural resource's, and work with us to restore it to it's beauty. Perhaps you saw the piece in the Sunday Globe Magazine on the 10 best places to live? Two of them featured wetlands and geese.
4. Update, March 26, 2009.
a. Marilyn printing.
In the March 26, 2009 edition, the Cambridge Chronicle printed a version of Marilyn's letter which was improved by her after she posted the above on the Internet.
b. Well intended but back-stabbed letter on Alewife not published in hard copy.
Also on line but not in the Cambridge Chronicle is a letter signed by a bunch of apparently well intentioned people which reads like they have been shafted by operatives friendly to the City of Cambridge / the eight plus bad city councilors (eight because there is one new member).
After speaking out in defense of the Silver Maple Forest, the letter supports the destruction of the Alewife reservation based on "planning."
"Planning" is another con game. People appointed by the Cambridge City Manager support destruction of whatever the Cambridge City Manager and eight plus bad city councilors are destroying.
Operatives friendly to the Cambridge City Manager / eight plus bad city councilors con well intentioned people into stabbing themselves in the back loudly proclaiming the beauties of "Planning." The operatives neglect to mention the vile environmental record of the Cambridge City Manager and neglect to mention the vile environmental record of eight plus Cambridge city councilors.
They also neglect to mention Monteiro v. City of Cambridge in which a jury found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of a black woman Cape Verdean department head because she filed a civil rights complaint.
The jury awarded $1.1 million plus damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The judge is reviewing the decision. It is my hope she orders the City Manager fired and stripped of his pension.
But the operatives always sound so good.
