Marilyn Wellons reports:
It is simply not true, as a DCR official has claimed yet again, that the hundreds of trees to be cut down on Memorial Drive between the BU and Longfellow Bridges are dead, diseased, or dying.
Following the DCR's own plans filed with the Cambridge Conservation Commission, I have marked trees to be cut down with orange surveyor's tape.
The plans include trees to be removed as part of the BU Bridge repairs that have destroyed most of the goose meadow. Consequently the trees adjacent to the BU Bridge and along the Mem Drive sidewalk presumably to remain, at least for now.
Continuing with the plans east from the stairs into the goose meadow to the BU Boathouse, individual trees and then the entire woods between the river and the sidewalk are to be removed, with one exception. It is a black willow at the water's edge, not visible from the sidewalk.
These official plans note that all trees 6" in diameter at breast height [dbh] have been inventoried, and that the plans mark all such trees. This is not the case. The plans are also inaccurate because they fail to show trees that have already been removed. Such inaccuracy would allow the DCR to claim the total number of trees ultimately cut down is less than that projected -- but of course that would be another lie.
From the BU Boathouse to the Longfellow Bridge are perhaps three or four dead trees and about the same with dangerous dieback that should be removed.
The plan is inconsistent for removal of some trees with dieback, either in the crown or elsewhere. I did not tape trees to be removed that I could not accurately locate from the plans. There are several of these.
What is consistent is the removal of hundreds of healthy trees, including most of the cherry trees and I believe all of the crabapples. Many tall, mature, healthy shade trees are also to go. Again, these trees healthy.
Healthy zelkovas, planted at public expense within the last twenty years or so, are also to be removed. Zelkovas are commonly used as replacements for elms as city street trees. Look, in particular, for ten or so east of the Mass. Ave. bridge and more around the boathouse entries.
Most of the trees in front of the MIT president's house are to be removed, presumably to improve sight lines to the river. I do wonder how much time she has to gaze either at the trees or the water, and if she does, how offensive she finds the elms and cherries to be cut down. I do know how much pleasure those trees' flowers give passers-by eager for color in the spring, and how colorful their leaves are in the fall.
In short, the vast majority of trees to be removed are those that offend the DCR designers' eyes and provide money for the DCR's true constituents' pockets. Apart from removing the few truly dead or diseased trees, the public benefit asserted is less than zero.
Please take a look between the BU and Longfellow Bridges for the orange ribbons, to see for yourself.
Marilyn Wellons
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Day 383, Who will be the Last Goose to Die?, Exchange with Governor's Office
1. Day 383.
2. Who will be the Last Goose to Die?
3. Response to "Last Goose to Die."
4. Comment to the Governor.
5. Reply From the Governor.
6. Individual Reply from Governor's Office.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 383.
During the rush hour on Monday, September 28, 2009, I did a visibility at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
It was a busy early evening because a lot of people were walking across the BU Bridge to go to the Red Sox game. I did a lot more talking than usual. I saw some old friends I have previously seen on prior extended visibilities.
One lady in particular was very concerned. She regularly comes to feed the Charles River White Geese and was shocked to see what had been done to them. She left in the direction of Brookline.
Another man commented what was also apparent to me: that the gaggle seems to have decreased in size.
A very, very bad situation.
2. Who will be the Last Goose to Die?
Archie Mazmanian, who lives just south of the BU Bridge in Brookline and who perhaps is a neighbor of the lady who said that she has been regularly feeding, reports:
******
If names could be assigned to each of the dwindling Charles River White Geese, they could be identified by name as they die. Which brings us to the title of this post. The responsible government officials continue NOT to take steps to prevent the annihilation of the White Geese.
3. Response to "Last Goose to Die."
Bob’s Response: The claim of no duty to behave responsibly as the DCR and Cambridge destroy, destroy and destroy says everything. That plus the repeated lying.
What lying?
Well how about the Globe article in which the DCR said they were destroying nothing but diseased trees?
The DCR's filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission says that almost all the trees to be destroyed are healthy.
If Massachusetts had a responsible governor, the person making that statement would be summarily fired.
And this outrage is part of a continuous pattern, not something unusual.
Cambridge and the state pols know that decent people would condemn them. So they lie.
4. Comment to the Governor.
I have just posted the preceding section to the governor on his email form at : http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us.
I used the following title: “Contempt for Ethics and for the Environment.”
With the following introduction:
“The following is taken from the Charles River White Geese Blog, today.”
5. Reply From the Governor.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with Governor Patrick. The Governor values your opinions and enjoys hearing from people across the Commonwealth. Please know that your views are always welcome in this administration.
The Governor and his staff strive to review every piece of correspondence in a timely manner. If appropriate, we will forward your message to the appropriate staff member, department or the state agency that can best address your concerns.
If you need an immediate response, please call the Governor's Office at 617-725-4005 to speak with a Constituent Services Aide. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your ideas with Governor Patrick. Stay involved and engaged...this is your government!
6. Individual Reply from Governor's Office.
Section 5 was added to the original report. This is subsequently added.
I have received the following from "Governor Patrick's Office" Gov.Webmail@state.ma.us> with a time stamp of 2:31 pm, September 29, 2009.
After the MANY comments I have posted on the governor's email page, this is the very first time I have received an individual response.
***********
Dear Robert J.,
On behalf of Governor Deval Patrick, thank you for your recent email regarding the Charles River Geese. We have shared your concerns with the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Please feel free to contact our office in the future with any further questions or concerns; your comments are always welcome in this administration.
Best regards,
Constituent Services Aide
617-725-4005
www.mass.gov/governor/contact
************
As I have reported earlier, we have been aware of environmental regulator types looking at the destroyed meadow, whether they have any knowledge of the flat out lies put out by the DCR to the Boston Globe is impossible to say.
2. Who will be the Last Goose to Die?
3. Response to "Last Goose to Die."
4. Comment to the Governor.
5. Reply From the Governor.
6. Individual Reply from Governor's Office.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 383.
During the rush hour on Monday, September 28, 2009, I did a visibility at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
It was a busy early evening because a lot of people were walking across the BU Bridge to go to the Red Sox game. I did a lot more talking than usual. I saw some old friends I have previously seen on prior extended visibilities.
One lady in particular was very concerned. She regularly comes to feed the Charles River White Geese and was shocked to see what had been done to them. She left in the direction of Brookline.
Another man commented what was also apparent to me: that the gaggle seems to have decreased in size.
A very, very bad situation.
2. Who will be the Last Goose to Die?
Archie Mazmanian, who lives just south of the BU Bridge in Brookline and who perhaps is a neighbor of the lady who said that she has been regularly feeding, reports:
******
If names could be assigned to each of the dwindling Charles River White Geese, they could be identified by name as they die. Which brings us to the title of this post. The responsible government officials continue NOT to take steps to prevent the annihilation of the White Geese.
3. Response to "Last Goose to Die."
Bob’s Response: The claim of no duty to behave responsibly as the DCR and Cambridge destroy, destroy and destroy says everything. That plus the repeated lying.
What lying?
Well how about the Globe article in which the DCR said they were destroying nothing but diseased trees?
The DCR's filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission says that almost all the trees to be destroyed are healthy.
If Massachusetts had a responsible governor, the person making that statement would be summarily fired.
And this outrage is part of a continuous pattern, not something unusual.
Cambridge and the state pols know that decent people would condemn them. So they lie.
4. Comment to the Governor.
I have just posted the preceding section to the governor on his email form at : http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us.
I used the following title: “Contempt for Ethics and for the Environment.”
With the following introduction:
“The following is taken from the Charles River White Geese Blog, today.”
5. Reply From the Governor.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with Governor Patrick. The Governor values your opinions and enjoys hearing from people across the Commonwealth. Please know that your views are always welcome in this administration.
The Governor and his staff strive to review every piece of correspondence in a timely manner. If appropriate, we will forward your message to the appropriate staff member, department or the state agency that can best address your concerns.
If you need an immediate response, please call the Governor's Office at 617-725-4005 to speak with a Constituent Services Aide. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your ideas with Governor Patrick. Stay involved and engaged...this is your government!
6. Individual Reply from Governor's Office.
Section 5 was added to the original report. This is subsequently added.
I have received the following from "Governor Patrick's Office" Gov.Webmail@state.ma.us> with a time stamp of 2:31 pm, September 29, 2009.
After the MANY comments I have posted on the governor's email page, this is the very first time I have received an individual response.
***********
Dear Robert J.,
On behalf of Governor Deval Patrick, thank you for your recent email regarding the Charles River Geese. We have shared your concerns with the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Please feel free to contact our office in the future with any further questions or concerns; your comments are always welcome in this administration.
Best regards,
Constituent Services Aide
617-725-4005
www.mass.gov/governor/contact
************
As I have reported earlier, we have been aware of environmental regulator types looking at the destroyed meadow, whether they have any knowledge of the flat out lies put out by the DCR to the Boston Globe is impossible to say.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Day 382, Urban Ring Buses Dead (?), Nonsensical Reporting
1. Day 382. Environmental people checking?
2. Urban Ring Buses Dead??
3. Chronicle prints Davis Response.
4. Nonsensical “News” Report from Allston Brighton Tab.
a. General.
b. Marilyn’s letter to the editor of the Allston Brighton Tab.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 283. Environmental people checking?
I conducted a visibility at the Destroyed Nesting Area during the rush hour on September 25, 2009.
People were as receptive and supportive as ever.
A bicyclist reported observing a couple of men observing the destruction in the vestigial goose habitat. He said they were environmental people.
An environmental person contacted a female supporter of the geese concerning the geese. She answered their questions and suggested they talk to Marilyn or me. She did not get an adequate answer as to why they were not doing so.
Clearly, the leafleting and other communications have had some sort of response.
A very major problem is the lying and other misbehavior coming out of the enemy, but then the last ten years has been a learning experience on the varieties that lying can take.
2. Urban Ring Buses Dead??
We have apparently reliable reports that a regional agency responsible for allocating federal funds has recommended no funds for the “Phase 2” bus proposal which would do so much damage to the Charles River and the animal habitat.
This bus proposal, like Magazine Beach, is a strikingly irresponsible proposal in the Charles River area plus related items to the north and south. It is a pleasure to see a responsible body in action.
By contrast, the Heavy Rail subway proposal, Kenmore Crossing is an excellent idea. I hope it goes forward.
3. Chronicle prints Davis Response.
My response, reported in these reports, to Councilor Davis’ bragging about her alleged “green” sainthood was printed in the September 24, 2009, Cambridge Chronicle. A limited number of words were edited, probably to get me down to 400 words. The deleted words were functionally duplicative.
4. Nonsensical “News” Report from Allston Brighton Tab.
a. General.
I gave this blog a copy of my press release on the Boston Conservation Commission barring the DCR from vegetation management on the Charles without direct supervision of the BCC. On Friday, September 25, 2009, the Allston Brighton Tab printed an alleged report on it.
The hard news, which the reporter agreed to me was not in disagreement, was quoted as our allegation, buried in a report which communicated the DCR’s shock at the format of my press release.
Nonsense.
The alleged news report was copied on line by the Cambridge Chronicle who is a sister newspaper.
b. Marilyn’s letter to the editor of the Allston Brighton Tab.
She entitled it: “DCR is confused?”
Valentina Zic, Editor
Allston/Brighton TAB
To the Editor:
I write to set the record straight about two issues.
One is the DCR's recent violation of the Boston Conservation Commission's Order of Conditions for cutting plants along the Charles in Allston.
At its September 16, 2009 hearing the ConCom found the DCR had indeed destroyed habitat for herons and herring protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. The ConCom's O.C. has specifically protected this habitat in Allston for many years.
To ensure protection, the ConCom ordered direct supervision by its own personnel of the DCR or its agents, including the Charles River Conservancy. Previous attempts to hold these entities to the O.C. had failed.
This is clearly news, as your September 25, 2009 article reports, quoting Bryan Glascock, ConCom Director: “We’ll send [staffer] Chris [Busch] out with the DCR crews to show what plants they can and cannot cut.”
The second issue is the distortion of this news, in an apparent attempt to change the subject to the discussion of an allegedly "misleading" press release —- the one that actually reported the DCR's violation of the O.C. and the ConCom's response. ("'Misunderstanding' over Charles River vegetation, geese ruffles Cambridge group's feathers").
I was one of the two contacts —- no City titles, no City of Boston e-mail addresses -— listed at the very beginning of that press release. Readers to its end find us baldly identified as "co-CEO’s of Friends of the White Geese, a Massachusetts non-profit which has been standing up to environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by public entities on the Charles River since 2000."
Your reporter followed up on the press release. He and I spoke from 1:18 to about 1:40 pm, September 17, 2009.
Responding to his direct question, I said I was not a member of the Boston ConCom, but a citizen concerned about the DCR's destruction of habitat along the Charles. He asked if I was affiliated with any organization. I said I was co-Chair with Robert La Tremouille of Friends of the White Geese. I do not know how anything could be clearer.
If the unnamed persons quoted in the article find the press release "misleading," it is not for any lack of clarity here. What the alleged "confusion" reveals is the DCR’s attempt to divert attention from its, and its agents', repeated violations of the Wetlands Protection Act and the Boston ConCom's laudable enforcement of that law.
2. Urban Ring Buses Dead??
3. Chronicle prints Davis Response.
4. Nonsensical “News” Report from Allston Brighton Tab.
a. General.
b. Marilyn’s letter to the editor of the Allston Brighton Tab.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 283. Environmental people checking?
I conducted a visibility at the Destroyed Nesting Area during the rush hour on September 25, 2009.
People were as receptive and supportive as ever.
A bicyclist reported observing a couple of men observing the destruction in the vestigial goose habitat. He said they were environmental people.
An environmental person contacted a female supporter of the geese concerning the geese. She answered their questions and suggested they talk to Marilyn or me. She did not get an adequate answer as to why they were not doing so.
Clearly, the leafleting and other communications have had some sort of response.
A very major problem is the lying and other misbehavior coming out of the enemy, but then the last ten years has been a learning experience on the varieties that lying can take.
2. Urban Ring Buses Dead??
We have apparently reliable reports that a regional agency responsible for allocating federal funds has recommended no funds for the “Phase 2” bus proposal which would do so much damage to the Charles River and the animal habitat.
This bus proposal, like Magazine Beach, is a strikingly irresponsible proposal in the Charles River area plus related items to the north and south. It is a pleasure to see a responsible body in action.
By contrast, the Heavy Rail subway proposal, Kenmore Crossing is an excellent idea. I hope it goes forward.
3. Chronicle prints Davis Response.
My response, reported in these reports, to Councilor Davis’ bragging about her alleged “green” sainthood was printed in the September 24, 2009, Cambridge Chronicle. A limited number of words were edited, probably to get me down to 400 words. The deleted words were functionally duplicative.
4. Nonsensical “News” Report from Allston Brighton Tab.
a. General.
I gave this blog a copy of my press release on the Boston Conservation Commission barring the DCR from vegetation management on the Charles without direct supervision of the BCC. On Friday, September 25, 2009, the Allston Brighton Tab printed an alleged report on it.
The hard news, which the reporter agreed to me was not in disagreement, was quoted as our allegation, buried in a report which communicated the DCR’s shock at the format of my press release.
Nonsense.
The alleged news report was copied on line by the Cambridge Chronicle who is a sister newspaper.
b. Marilyn’s letter to the editor of the Allston Brighton Tab.
She entitled it: “DCR is confused?”
Valentina Zic, Editor
Allston/Brighton TAB
To the Editor:
I write to set the record straight about two issues.
One is the DCR's recent violation of the Boston Conservation Commission's Order of Conditions for cutting plants along the Charles in Allston.
At its September 16, 2009 hearing the ConCom found the DCR had indeed destroyed habitat for herons and herring protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. The ConCom's O.C. has specifically protected this habitat in Allston for many years.
To ensure protection, the ConCom ordered direct supervision by its own personnel of the DCR or its agents, including the Charles River Conservancy. Previous attempts to hold these entities to the O.C. had failed.
This is clearly news, as your September 25, 2009 article reports, quoting Bryan Glascock, ConCom Director: “We’ll send [staffer] Chris [Busch] out with the DCR crews to show what plants they can and cannot cut.”
The second issue is the distortion of this news, in an apparent attempt to change the subject to the discussion of an allegedly "misleading" press release —- the one that actually reported the DCR's violation of the O.C. and the ConCom's response. ("'Misunderstanding' over Charles River vegetation, geese ruffles Cambridge group's feathers").
I was one of the two contacts —- no City titles, no City of Boston e-mail addresses -— listed at the very beginning of that press release. Readers to its end find us baldly identified as "co-CEO’s of Friends of the White Geese, a Massachusetts non-profit which has been standing up to environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by public entities on the Charles River since 2000."
Your reporter followed up on the press release. He and I spoke from 1:18 to about 1:40 pm, September 17, 2009.
Responding to his direct question, I said I was not a member of the Boston ConCom, but a citizen concerned about the DCR's destruction of habitat along the Charles. He asked if I was affiliated with any organization. I said I was co-Chair with Robert La Tremouille of Friends of the White Geese. I do not know how anything could be clearer.
If the unnamed persons quoted in the article find the press release "misleading," it is not for any lack of clarity here. What the alleged "confusion" reveals is the DCR’s attempt to divert attention from its, and its agents', repeated violations of the Wetlands Protection Act and the Boston ConCom's laudable enforcement of that law.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Montero Update: City Admits Notice of Appeal Void
Bob La Trémouille Reports:
The following entry was added to the docket of Monteiro v. Cambridge on September 17, 2009:
Because of oddities in the application used in the docket, the docket loses all paragraphing in its entries.
I have inserted paragraphing to make the communication more readable. The paragraphing is my interpretation and does not claim to be that included in the original writing.
Joan A. Lukey is the attorney for the City of Cambridge.
Rule 59, mentioned in the last paragraph concerns “New Trials: Amendment of Judgments.” Since the plaintiff’s motion very clearly concerns amendment of judgment, that comes as no surprise. I have been informed that the motion was filed by the plaintiff because the plaintiff believes that the interest awarded, currently about half a million dollars, is too small.
The final sentence admits that the notice of appeal filed by Cambridge was not proper and thus is void.
**************
Court received a letter from attorney Joan A Lukey:
*******
On September 10,2009, I sent a letter attaching the Transcripts for May 7, 2008 and May 8, 2008, and certified, because I believed it to be true, that the entire trial transcipt was complete.
As it turns out, the trial transcripts are complete, but the transcript for one motion hearing in 2005 relating to the first trial, and the transcript for the post trial motion hearing in 2008, both requested by Plaintiff, apparently are not complete. The transcript for the two day motion hearing in January of 2005, also requested by Plaintiff, is in hand but not yet filed.
Please accept my apologies for the mistake and allow me to formally retract the certification. We shall file these motion-hearing transcripts as soon as they are ready, which we believe will be shortly.
We understand that the trial judge is treating Plaintiff's motion currently under advisement as a Rule 59 motion, not a motion for reconsideration. Hence, we shall be refilling our Notice of Appeal once the Judge has ruled.
The following entry was added to the docket of Monteiro v. Cambridge on September 17, 2009:
Because of oddities in the application used in the docket, the docket loses all paragraphing in its entries.
I have inserted paragraphing to make the communication more readable. The paragraphing is my interpretation and does not claim to be that included in the original writing.
Joan A. Lukey is the attorney for the City of Cambridge.
Rule 59, mentioned in the last paragraph concerns “New Trials: Amendment of Judgments.” Since the plaintiff’s motion very clearly concerns amendment of judgment, that comes as no surprise. I have been informed that the motion was filed by the plaintiff because the plaintiff believes that the interest awarded, currently about half a million dollars, is too small.
The final sentence admits that the notice of appeal filed by Cambridge was not proper and thus is void.
**************
Court received a letter from attorney Joan A Lukey:
*******
On September 10,2009, I sent a letter attaching the Transcripts for May 7, 2008 and May 8, 2008, and certified, because I believed it to be true, that the entire trial transcipt was complete.
As it turns out, the trial transcripts are complete, but the transcript for one motion hearing in 2005 relating to the first trial, and the transcript for the post trial motion hearing in 2008, both requested by Plaintiff, apparently are not complete. The transcript for the two day motion hearing in January of 2005, also requested by Plaintiff, is in hand but not yet filed.
Please accept my apologies for the mistake and allow me to formally retract the certification. We shall file these motion-hearing transcripts as soon as they are ready, which we believe will be shortly.
We understand that the trial judge is treating Plaintiff's motion currently under advisement as a Rule 59 motion, not a motion for reconsideration. Hence, we shall be refilling our Notice of Appeal once the Judge has ruled.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
SLAUGHTER: BABY SEALS/WHITE GEESE
Archie Mazmanian reports:
The annual slaughter of baby seals in Canada for their pelts continues despite the protests of animal rights groups. Over the years such protests have at least resulted in limitations on the numbers of baby seals slaughtered.
The Charles River White Geese are not being slaughtered in a similar manner for their down. But dead is dead. And that will be the result for these White Geese as they are slowly squeezed to oblivion, the entire gaggle. No, our government officials responsible for this do not have the blood of the White Geese on their hands as do the bashers of the baby seals. But in the end, what’s the difference, what’s more humane? DEAD IS DEAD!
The annual slaughter of baby seals in Canada for their pelts continues despite the protests of animal rights groups. Over the years such protests have at least resulted in limitations on the numbers of baby seals slaughtered.
The Charles River White Geese are not being slaughtered in a similar manner for their down. But dead is dead. And that will be the result for these White Geese as they are slowly squeezed to oblivion, the entire gaggle. No, our government officials responsible for this do not have the blood of the White Geese on their hands as do the bashers of the baby seals. But in the end, what’s the difference, what’s more humane? DEAD IS DEAD!
Great Blue Heron and other fine residents – Yo, Save the Geese
Bob La Trémouille reports.
Kathy Podgers has provided some fine links to photos of the Charles River.
http://www.bu.edu/today/campus-life/2009/06/26/great-blue-heron
http://www.epa.gov/NE/charles/photos.html
http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/2009/05/kayaking-charles-river.html
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/09/09/dry_spell_leaves_charles_river_low/
http://www.historicpages.com/geese/wg.htm
I find it quite interesting that the Federal EPA has some excellent photos of the Charles River White Geese, under attack by a really bad Cambridge City Council, by a Department on Conservation and Recreation which has been sanctioned by the Boston Conservation Commission for its environmental destructiveness and by a bunch of other baddies.
Regrettably, one of the other baddies has announced for US Senate. Capuano’s successes include Obama money for destruction of hundreds of healthy trees on the Charles River and further heartless animal abuse directed at the Charles River White Geese. Capuano would fit in very well with the Cambridge City Council. We have a judge’s decision calling the City of Cambridge “reprehensible” in the Monteiro civil rights case.
The last is an excellent collection from Phil Barber who has followed the Charles River White Geese closely. I am quite certain we have a link to it.
She provided the following in a transmittal:
http://cctvcambridge.org/node/2037
http://www.pbase.com/dellybean/goslings
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1885883219/Guest-commentary-BU-Bridge-project-irresponsible
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1354565781020918160#
The first is a beautiful analysis which I was aware of but had not seen before. I am quite pleased to now see it.
The last is Roy Bercaw’s excellent video from 2000. The transmittals say 2001. The video says 2000.
The dellybean collection is on a link from this blog. As the author of the third item, I strongly support it.
Kathy earlier provided the following, from a film competition, with the following introduction:
“Marilyn, the film fest movie star! Have you heard this?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG1d29stwnQ
This was done by a group of Northeastern University students.
Thank you very much Kathy.
Kathy Podgers has provided some fine links to photos of the Charles River.
http://www.bu.edu/today/campus-life/2009/06/26/great-blue-heron
http://www.epa.gov/NE/charles/photos.html
http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/2009/05/kayaking-charles-river.html
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/09/09/dry_spell_leaves_charles_river_low/
http://www.historicpages.com/geese/wg.htm
I find it quite interesting that the Federal EPA has some excellent photos of the Charles River White Geese, under attack by a really bad Cambridge City Council, by a Department on Conservation and Recreation which has been sanctioned by the Boston Conservation Commission for its environmental destructiveness and by a bunch of other baddies.
Regrettably, one of the other baddies has announced for US Senate. Capuano’s successes include Obama money for destruction of hundreds of healthy trees on the Charles River and further heartless animal abuse directed at the Charles River White Geese. Capuano would fit in very well with the Cambridge City Council. We have a judge’s decision calling the City of Cambridge “reprehensible” in the Monteiro civil rights case.
The last is an excellent collection from Phil Barber who has followed the Charles River White Geese closely. I am quite certain we have a link to it.
She provided the following in a transmittal:
http://cctvcambridge.org/node/2037
http://www.pbase.com/dellybean/goslings
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1885883219/Guest-commentary-BU-Bridge-project-irresponsible
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1354565781020918160#
The first is a beautiful analysis which I was aware of but had not seen before. I am quite pleased to now see it.
The last is Roy Bercaw’s excellent video from 2000. The transmittals say 2001. The video says 2000.
The dellybean collection is on a link from this blog. As the author of the third item, I strongly support it.
Kathy earlier provided the following, from a film competition, with the following introduction:
“Marilyn, the film fest movie star! Have you heard this?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG1d29stwnQ
This was done by a group of Northeastern University students.
Thank you very much Kathy.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Urgent: please contact Governor Patrick
Urgent appeal to contact Governor Patrick:
As of today, September 17, the Governor has not signed off on the DCR's Ch. 91 license for a BU Bridge stormwater system that unnecessarily destroys the goose meadow. Much of the clearing there has been for that system.
It could connect to the MWRA plant just west of the bridge in Cambridge instead of going through the goose meadow. The MWRA option is both physically and bureaucratically possible. The DCR however has chosen to use the stormwater system as an excuse for the habitat destruction we see.
Please contact Governor Patrick, to urge him NOT TO SIGN the Ch. 91 license that allows this destructive project to go forward:
telephone: 617-725-4005
e-mail form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us.
Marilyn Wellons
As of today, September 17, the Governor has not signed off on the DCR's Ch. 91 license for a BU Bridge stormwater system that unnecessarily destroys the goose meadow. Much of the clearing there has been for that system.
It could connect to the MWRA plant just west of the bridge in Cambridge instead of going through the goose meadow. The MWRA option is both physically and bureaucratically possible. The DCR however has chosen to use the stormwater system as an excuse for the habitat destruction we see.
Please contact Governor Patrick, to urge him NOT TO SIGN the Ch. 91 license that allows this destructive project to go forward:
telephone: 617-725-4005
e-mail form: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us.
Marilyn Wellons
Boston Conservation Commission orders State to cease cutting vegetation on the Boston side of the Charles except under direct supervision of the BCC.
Bob La Trémouille reports:
I have issued the following press release this morning, September 17, 2009:
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Boston Conservation Commission orders Commonwealth’s Department of Conservation and Recreation to cease cutting vegetation on the Boston side of the Charles River except under the direct supervision of BCC staff.
CONTACTS:
Marilyn Wellons, onblueriver@yahoo.com, 617-792-7738
Bob La Trémouille, boblat@yahoo.com, 617-283-7649
Wednesday evening, September 16, 2009, the Boston Conservation Commission ordered the Commonwealth’s Department of Conservation and Recreation to cease cutting vegetation on the Boston side of the Charles River except under the direct supervision of BCC staff.
This order was given as a result of five years of annual and consistent violation of responsible vegetation management practices and direct violation of existing agreements between the BCC and the DCR.
Representing the DCR were Mr. Richard Corsi who has been managing severe environmental destruction at Cambridge’s Magazine Beach and has publicly bragged about starving the popular and valuable Charles River White Geese.
Corsi brought with him a representative of the Charles River Conservancy which does the most destructive vegetation cutting and a DCR employee who is one of two employees operating a machine used for vegetation cutting.
The employee asked for direction from the BCC. The BCC repeatedly pointed out the existing written agreement which had been directly violated.
One concern of the BCC was the recent clear cutting of false indigo in the area west of the BU Bridge in direct violation of an agreement not to cut it. Mr. La Trémouille observed a CRC crew doing the destruction essentially simultaneously with the DCR’s excessive destruction at the goose meadow on the Cambridge side of the Charles River .
The board asked Mr. Corsi about a Boston Globe report concerning the planned destruction of hundreds of trees with Obama stimulus moneys. This destruction is slated for the Cambridge side of the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges . It will include massive destruction of animal habitat between the BU Boathouse and the Memorial Drive split / seawall, and an increase in the starvation
attacks on the Charles River White Geese.
Mr. Corsi responded that he had no knowledge of the project and then proceeded to affirm that nothing was being destroyed except diseased trees. This is contrary to reasons given in the DCR's own filing for the project with the Cambridge Conservation Commission in a public document on file there.
Mr. La Trémouille commented that La Trémouille was quoted in the article and La Trémouille had been shocked to see what the DCR had told the reporter and which Mr. Corsi had just repeated.
This tree destruction is part of an ongoing project in which the DCR wants to destroy massive numbers of healthy trees because they do not appear on 19th Century plans for the area when it was a tidal wetlands. The plans, which are now six years old, included destruction of diseased trees.
Mr. La Trémouille commented to the board that what was not stated to the Globe reporter or by Mr. Corsi was that the diseased trees were destroyed five years ago.
Ms. Wellons has better on the ground knowledge. She comments: “The vast majority of trees now slated for destruction are healthy valuable trees. Most of the dead and diseased trees have been removed. There are a few obviously dead trees remaining that should be removed. The fresh sawdust and gashes on the trunk of a tree near two stumps indicate the DCR is still at work. ”
Ms. Wellons has repeatedly complained to the Boston Conservation Commission about lawless destruction of vegetation by the DCR during its five years of destruction. The repeated destruction of ground vegetation was condemned by the BCC.
There has been repeated destruction of healthy trees with a chain saw by a director of the Charles River Conservancy, several occurrences in the presence of Ms. Wellons.
Wellons and La Trémouille praise the BCC for its action. La Trémouille commented at the meeting that he thought the BCC should put “this rogue agency” under court control with regard to its work on the Charles River . Nevertheless, he believes the BCC should be praised for this first step.
La Trémouille and Wellons are co-CEO’s of Friends of the White Geese, a Massachusetts non-profit which has been standing up to environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by public entities on the Charles River since 2000.
I have issued the following press release this morning, September 17, 2009:
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Boston Conservation Commission orders Commonwealth’s Department of Conservation and Recreation to cease cutting vegetation on the Boston side of the Charles River except under the direct supervision of BCC staff.
CONTACTS:
Marilyn Wellons, onblueriver@yahoo.com, 617-792-7738
Bob La Trémouille, boblat@yahoo.com, 617-283-7649
Wednesday evening, September 16, 2009, the Boston Conservation Commission ordered the Commonwealth’s Department of Conservation and Recreation to cease cutting vegetation on the Boston side of the Charles River except under the direct supervision of BCC staff.
This order was given as a result of five years of annual and consistent violation of responsible vegetation management practices and direct violation of existing agreements between the BCC and the DCR.
Representing the DCR were Mr. Richard Corsi who has been managing severe environmental destruction at Cambridge’s Magazine Beach and has publicly bragged about starving the popular and valuable Charles River White Geese.
Corsi brought with him a representative of the Charles River Conservancy which does the most destructive vegetation cutting and a DCR employee who is one of two employees operating a machine used for vegetation cutting.
The employee asked for direction from the BCC. The BCC repeatedly pointed out the existing written agreement which had been directly violated.
One concern of the BCC was the recent clear cutting of false indigo in the area west of the BU Bridge in direct violation of an agreement not to cut it. Mr. La Trémouille observed a CRC crew doing the destruction essentially simultaneously with the DCR’s excessive destruction at the goose meadow on the Cambridge side of the Charles River .
The board asked Mr. Corsi about a Boston Globe report concerning the planned destruction of hundreds of trees with Obama stimulus moneys. This destruction is slated for the Cambridge side of the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges . It will include massive destruction of animal habitat between the BU Boathouse and the Memorial Drive split / seawall, and an increase in the starvation
attacks on the Charles River White Geese.
Mr. Corsi responded that he had no knowledge of the project and then proceeded to affirm that nothing was being destroyed except diseased trees. This is contrary to reasons given in the DCR's own filing for the project with the Cambridge Conservation Commission in a public document on file there.
Mr. La Trémouille commented that La Trémouille was quoted in the article and La Trémouille had been shocked to see what the DCR had told the reporter and which Mr. Corsi had just repeated.
This tree destruction is part of an ongoing project in which the DCR wants to destroy massive numbers of healthy trees because they do not appear on 19th Century plans for the area when it was a tidal wetlands. The plans, which are now six years old, included destruction of diseased trees.
Mr. La Trémouille commented to the board that what was not stated to the Globe reporter or by Mr. Corsi was that the diseased trees were destroyed five years ago.
Ms. Wellons has better on the ground knowledge. She comments: “The vast majority of trees now slated for destruction are healthy valuable trees. Most of the dead and diseased trees have been removed. There are a few obviously dead trees remaining that should be removed. The fresh sawdust and gashes on the trunk of a tree near two stumps indicate the DCR is still at work. ”
Ms. Wellons has repeatedly complained to the Boston Conservation Commission about lawless destruction of vegetation by the DCR during its five years of destruction. The repeated destruction of ground vegetation was condemned by the BCC.
There has been repeated destruction of healthy trees with a chain saw by a director of the Charles River Conservancy, several occurrences in the presence of Ms. Wellons.
Wellons and La Trémouille praise the BCC for its action. La Trémouille commented at the meeting that he thought the BCC should put “this rogue agency” under court control with regard to its work on the Charles River . Nevertheless, he believes the BCC should be praised for this first step.
La Trémouille and Wellons are co-CEO’s of Friends of the White Geese, a Massachusetts non-profit which has been standing up to environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse by public entities on the Charles River since 2000.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Day 381. Councilor Davis “champion for all things green”?
1. Visibility.
2. Councilor Davis “champion for all things green”?
Bob La Trémouille reports:
1. Visibility.
I leafleted and displayed a pro-geese, pro-Charles River sign on Monday, March 14, 2009, at the entrance to the destroyed nesting area.
People, as usual, were very responsive.
More drivers than usual pulled over to take fliers, perhaps because they have now seen us out for a number of times.
2. Councilor Davis “champion for all things green”?
I, this morning submitted the following letter to the Cambridge Chronicle:
**********
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The Chronicle (9/10/09, page 3) quotes Councilor Davis as saying she is the “champion for all things green.”
Cambridge and its friends are destroying the environment and resident animals at Fresh Pond, Alewife, on the Charles and in too many other public works projects.
Davis has publicly bragged about the outrage being inflicted on the Charles River by her, by Cambridge and by friends working with Cambridge or using Cambridge money as seed money. Her supporters brag of the heartless animal abuse aimed at the beloved and valuable Charles River White Geese.
Most people looking at Magazine Beach could never imagine any need for “improvement” and the “achievements” of Davis and friends have been exactly the opposite.
They have destroyed green maintenance at Magazine Beach. They have destroyed part of the playing fields to install a drainage system to drain off poisons which should not be dumped on the banks of the Charles River. The drainage system cannot possibly drain off her poisons during the worst of storms, so they will poison the Charles River, just as Tartan poisoned the Charles River in a related project near Beacon Hill in Boston. Clearly they will poison feeding animals.
The Magazine Beach manager has bragged that the wall of vegetation which was introduced blocking off the Charles from Magazine Beach starves the Charles River While Geese. The supporters claim that walling off the Charles helps swimming.
The current BU Bridge repairs have been timed to do maximum harm to animals and the environment. Half of the destruction in the meadow east of the bridge is for parking that belongs under Memorial Drive. Instead of allowing the White Geese to return to Magazine Beach where they fed for most of their 30 year residence on the Charles, the managers have confined them to one quarter of their now destroyed but until recently lush nesting area.
Obama moneys are being used to destroy hundreds of healthy trees between there and the Longfellow Bridge. Obama moneys will further destroy habitat and food across from the Hyatt.
Perhaps thousands of healthy trees and animal habitat are being destroyed at Fresh Pond to plant saplings.
Alewife is being destroyed for flood storage that belongs under the parking lot north of the railroad tracks.
“Champion for all things green?” A more accurate statement is that of the judge in the Monteiro civil rights case (notice of appeal filed). The judge called Cambridge “reprehensible.”
2. Councilor Davis “champion for all things green”?
Bob La Trémouille reports:
1. Visibility.
I leafleted and displayed a pro-geese, pro-Charles River sign on Monday, March 14, 2009, at the entrance to the destroyed nesting area.
People, as usual, were very responsive.
More drivers than usual pulled over to take fliers, perhaps because they have now seen us out for a number of times.
2. Councilor Davis “champion for all things green”?
I, this morning submitted the following letter to the Cambridge Chronicle:
**********
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The Chronicle (9/10/09, page 3) quotes Councilor Davis as saying she is the “champion for all things green.”
Cambridge and its friends are destroying the environment and resident animals at Fresh Pond, Alewife, on the Charles and in too many other public works projects.
Davis has publicly bragged about the outrage being inflicted on the Charles River by her, by Cambridge and by friends working with Cambridge or using Cambridge money as seed money. Her supporters brag of the heartless animal abuse aimed at the beloved and valuable Charles River White Geese.
Most people looking at Magazine Beach could never imagine any need for “improvement” and the “achievements” of Davis and friends have been exactly the opposite.
They have destroyed green maintenance at Magazine Beach. They have destroyed part of the playing fields to install a drainage system to drain off poisons which should not be dumped on the banks of the Charles River. The drainage system cannot possibly drain off her poisons during the worst of storms, so they will poison the Charles River, just as Tartan poisoned the Charles River in a related project near Beacon Hill in Boston. Clearly they will poison feeding animals.
The Magazine Beach manager has bragged that the wall of vegetation which was introduced blocking off the Charles from Magazine Beach starves the Charles River While Geese. The supporters claim that walling off the Charles helps swimming.
The current BU Bridge repairs have been timed to do maximum harm to animals and the environment. Half of the destruction in the meadow east of the bridge is for parking that belongs under Memorial Drive. Instead of allowing the White Geese to return to Magazine Beach where they fed for most of their 30 year residence on the Charles, the managers have confined them to one quarter of their now destroyed but until recently lush nesting area.
Obama moneys are being used to destroy hundreds of healthy trees between there and the Longfellow Bridge. Obama moneys will further destroy habitat and food across from the Hyatt.
Perhaps thousands of healthy trees and animal habitat are being destroyed at Fresh Pond to plant saplings.
Alewife is being destroyed for flood storage that belongs under the parking lot north of the railroad tracks.
“Champion for all things green?” A more accurate statement is that of the judge in the Monteiro civil rights case (notice of appeal filed). The judge called Cambridge “reprehensible.”
Friday, September 11, 2009
Visibility at the goose meadow, Day 380
Marilyn Wellons reports:
Ellin, Bob and I all leafleted at the destroyed goose meadow on Thursday, September 10. People who didn't already have copies of the flyer were worried about what they saw. Many stopped to talk, to find out about the DCR's destruction and illegalities.
Combined with the DCR's destruction of habitat at Magazine Beach and its planned removal of hundreds of trees along Memorial Drive between the goose meadow and the Longfellow Bridge, this project starkly reveals the agency as the false steward of the environment, for humans and other creatures alike.
Ellin, Bob and I all leafleted at the destroyed goose meadow on Thursday, September 10. People who didn't already have copies of the flyer were worried about what they saw. Many stopped to talk, to find out about the DCR's destruction and illegalities.
Combined with the DCR's destruction of habitat at Magazine Beach and its planned removal of hundreds of trees along Memorial Drive between the goose meadow and the Longfellow Bridge, this project starkly reveals the agency as the false steward of the environment, for humans and other creatures alike.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Day 379, Silence, Bad Guys, Info on Monteiro
1. Day 379.
2. Archie Mazmanian: Silence.
3. Inexcusable behavior from the bad guys.
4. Monteiro.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 379.
I did a visibility on Wednesday, September 9.
Really nice reception from the public. Very nice.
A lot of people were very distressed at the obvious distress of the gaggle.
2. Archie Mazmanian: Silence.
Archie Mazmanian reports:
As the annihilation of the Charles River White Geese continues under the auspices of state and local government continues, soon we shail hear no more of their honking - SILENCE!
But preceding this "final solution" of state and local government, we have had SILENCE from:
Governor Patrick and his administration
Cambridge Senators/Representatives
Cambridge municipal officials (elected/appointed)
Non-profit conservation (so-called) groups
on the plight of the White Geese. This SILENCE has been deafening. Maybe years from now when government officials plan a similar annihilation, they may comfort their consciences with: "Who remembers the Charles River White Geese?"
Some of us will remember. Don't get mad, get even.
3. Inexcusable behavior from the bad guys.
The dirty trick is for the really reprehensible to masquerade as decent human beings.
A long time but now past incumbent city councilor gave me a great big wave and a smile as I left Marilyn’s on Tuesday. The look of my face in response was not pleasant.
Last night, after the visibility, Marilyn and I were at a city council candidate’s night in East Cambridge. One of the more hypocritical of the fake environmentalists on the city council did not quite approach me as aggressively as Marilyn’s neighbor. He also did not get any response, rather than the recognition of stench passed on to his compatriot.
PLEASE NOTE: There are a lot of these events. We do not report them unless there is a reason.
I mentioned to the below lady that I have a copy of the key Monteiro decision posted on this blog (link to the right at the top).
Before I left early, another candidate came to get specifics on how to get the opinion.
The various very destructive fake environmentalists are running around claiming to be environmentalists. These lies are how they get reelected.
One of the most destructive, Representative Walz, is doing a speech to a City Manager group this evening bragging about her sanctity.
The very destructive fake environmentalists on the City Council have scheduled two fake meetings to lie to the public that they are holier than thou. One meeting, on September 17, will be held a few blocks from the Charles River. A second will be held in City Hall on September 24.
I agree with the judge, “reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
4. Monteiro.
I had an excellent conversation with a lady working for one of the non-incumbents at the Candidate’s Night. Both she and the non-incumbent are attorneys and she has actually looked at and copied many of the real Monteiro papers. I have not. Whenever I have looked for things, the file has been on the judge’s desk. I have since been happy with working from the docket on line.
The most recent hearing on the Monteiro case occurred on August 26. This should have been on a motion by the plaintiff to clarify the judgement. This lady tells me that the plaintiff is concerned about the effective date for award of interest on the damages.
Interest is of major importance because, even without a change, the judgment awarded something like $500,000 in interest, in addition to the $4.5 million plus damages (including $3.5 million penal).
2. Archie Mazmanian: Silence.
3. Inexcusable behavior from the bad guys.
4. Monteiro.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 379.
I did a visibility on Wednesday, September 9.
Really nice reception from the public. Very nice.
A lot of people were very distressed at the obvious distress of the gaggle.
2. Archie Mazmanian: Silence.
Archie Mazmanian reports:
As the annihilation of the Charles River White Geese continues under the auspices of state and local government continues, soon we shail hear no more of their honking - SILENCE!
But preceding this "final solution" of state and local government, we have had SILENCE from:
Governor Patrick and his administration
Cambridge Senators/Representatives
Cambridge municipal officials (elected/appointed)
Non-profit conservation (so-called) groups
on the plight of the White Geese. This SILENCE has been deafening. Maybe years from now when government officials plan a similar annihilation, they may comfort their consciences with: "Who remembers the Charles River White Geese?"
Some of us will remember. Don't get mad, get even.
3. Inexcusable behavior from the bad guys.
The dirty trick is for the really reprehensible to masquerade as decent human beings.
A long time but now past incumbent city councilor gave me a great big wave and a smile as I left Marilyn’s on Tuesday. The look of my face in response was not pleasant.
Last night, after the visibility, Marilyn and I were at a city council candidate’s night in East Cambridge. One of the more hypocritical of the fake environmentalists on the city council did not quite approach me as aggressively as Marilyn’s neighbor. He also did not get any response, rather than the recognition of stench passed on to his compatriot.
PLEASE NOTE: There are a lot of these events. We do not report them unless there is a reason.
I mentioned to the below lady that I have a copy of the key Monteiro decision posted on this blog (link to the right at the top).
Before I left early, another candidate came to get specifics on how to get the opinion.
The various very destructive fake environmentalists are running around claiming to be environmentalists. These lies are how they get reelected.
One of the most destructive, Representative Walz, is doing a speech to a City Manager group this evening bragging about her sanctity.
The very destructive fake environmentalists on the City Council have scheduled two fake meetings to lie to the public that they are holier than thou. One meeting, on September 17, will be held a few blocks from the Charles River. A second will be held in City Hall on September 24.
I agree with the judge, “reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
4. Monteiro.
I had an excellent conversation with a lady working for one of the non-incumbents at the Candidate’s Night. Both she and the non-incumbent are attorneys and she has actually looked at and copied many of the real Monteiro papers. I have not. Whenever I have looked for things, the file has been on the judge’s desk. I have since been happy with working from the docket on line.
The most recent hearing on the Monteiro case occurred on August 26. This should have been on a motion by the plaintiff to clarify the judgement. This lady tells me that the plaintiff is concerned about the effective date for award of interest on the damages.
Interest is of major importance because, even without a change, the judgment awarded something like $500,000 in interest, in addition to the $4.5 million plus damages (including $3.5 million penal).
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Day 378. DCR Hiding.
The devastation at the goose meadow is unchanged from yesterday.
Activity with decent people in my visibility at the nesting area was so busy that, at one time, I had four people lined up for leaflets.
Lots of good people cannot understand why Governor Patrick’s people are so heartless and so destructive.
One lady came up to me in my favorite coffee shop and reported that she had left a message at the DCR, trying to talk with them, but the message has not been answered.
Activity with decent people in my visibility at the nesting area was so busy that, at one time, I had four people lined up for leaflets.
Lots of good people cannot understand why Governor Patrick’s people are so heartless and so destructive.
One lady came up to me in my favorite coffee shop and reported that she had left a message at the DCR, trying to talk with them, but the message has not been answered.
Monday, September 07, 2009
Day 377. Patrick’s People make destruction worse.
1. Introduction.
2. Conditions.
3. Decent Human Beings.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Introduction.
On Monday, September 7, 2009, I conducted the 377th day of visibilities at the destroyed nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
2. Conditions.
It always a severe mistake to say: “They would never stoop so low” with regard to the Cambridge Pols or with regard to Governor Patrick’s people.
It looks like they are dumping materials to create a full stage parking lot.
When I last saw this outrage, the dirt in the construction zone, formerly nesting bushes and vegetation, was dirt colored. Now it is clay colored.
On top of this clay outrage has been dumped a load of crushed stone.
If Governor Patrick tells you he is a decent human being, laugh in his face.
As far as the Cambridge Pols go, well we have the judge’s word on them: “Reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
3. Decent Human Beings.
I was well greeted by people who were shocked.
2. Conditions.
3. Decent Human Beings.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Introduction.
On Monday, September 7, 2009, I conducted the 377th day of visibilities at the destroyed nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
2. Conditions.
It always a severe mistake to say: “They would never stoop so low” with regard to the Cambridge Pols or with regard to Governor Patrick’s people.
It looks like they are dumping materials to create a full stage parking lot.
When I last saw this outrage, the dirt in the construction zone, formerly nesting bushes and vegetation, was dirt colored. Now it is clay colored.
On top of this clay outrage has been dumped a load of crushed stone.
If Governor Patrick tells you he is a decent human being, laugh in his face.
As far as the Cambridge Pols go, well we have the judge’s word on them: “Reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
3. Decent Human Beings.
I was well greeted by people who were shocked.
Sunday, September 06, 2009
"They [Charles River White Geese] Were Expendable"
Bob La Trémouille edits and reports.
1. "They were expendable."
2. Comment from the Editor.
1. "They were expendable."
From Archie Mazmanian:
This may serve as the headline of an obituary shortly as the current annihilation takes place. Assuming the MWRA introduced a gaggle of White Geese in the 1980s in the area of the BU Bridge - although there may have been an pre-existing gaggle - was the gig for that gaggle to improve water quality or to serve some other environmental purpose? Perhaps the services of the White Geese are no longer required. If such is the case, why not relocate the gaggle? The White Geese are not overrunning the area of the BU Bridge.
Today's Sunday NYTimes (9/6/09) includes a feature in its first section titled "Tick-Borne Illnesses Have Nantucket Considering Some Deer-Based Solutions" by Pam Belluch about that island's Lyme and other disease problems related to deer ticks. Deer were introduced to Nantucket and proliferated. A Boston Globe story on Block Island several years ago disclosed a similar situation there. A proposed solution was to reduce - not annihilate - the deer herd. Animal rights protestors have objected.
I mention this article to contrast the situation with the White Geese, who to my knowledge are not creating health problems for the adjoining community and have not innundated the area. In fact, the White Geese are being squeezed. The "people" behind this do not propose to slaughter the White Geese with abatoir techniques because of the anticipated response to such barbarism. Starving the beast provides these "people" with a clearer conscience. Besides, relocating them can be costly as well as difficult. These "people" are relying upon the fact that the gaggle is not that large. Few know of the plight of the White Geese as they have been squeezed out of the public's vision, as it is difficult for the gaggle to enjoy the waters of the Charles River. Out of sight, out of mind. There is a name for this when a minority of humans are involved.
The deer continue on Nantucket and Block Island, increasing in numbers, despite extended hunting seasons. The White Geese cause us no harm. Isn't there something wrong with this?
2. Comment from the Editor.
When I originally posted Archie's comments, I took the move comment in the vein I really think he meant it. On rethinking, some elaboration is needed.
Clearly the explanation of the Cambridge Pols for the outrage of heartless animal abuse EXACTLY fits Archie's analysis. To the extent these supposed humans deign to mention their behavior, the explanation translates as "These are the little guys. How dare you object to us destroying the little guys."
The Monteiro judge and jury were exposed to this mentality. $5 million damages, including $3.5 million penal.
“Reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
As far as moving goes, Friends of the White Geese have proposed moving and part of the vileness of Patrick's people is the fact that they have not been moved during what is supposed to be temporary work.
The Charles River White Geese should be allowed to return to their home of most of the last 30 years, Magazine Beach.
The outrageous starvation wall should be chopped down. The poisons being dumped on the fields at Magazine Beach by people, state and city, with contempt for the environment should be ended. The expensive poison drainage systems should be filled in since there should be no need for them. The Charles River White Geese should be allowed to return to their nesting area when the Charles River White Geese deem it necessary. The bizarre staging destruction should be removed and returned to nature. The staging should be under Memorial Drive. Plans to use Obama money to destroy hundreds of trees to the east and create another starvation initiative should destroyed. When the project has been completed with minimal environmental harm nature should be reinstated at the nesting area was in September 1999.
This would restore the status quo before the heartless animal abuse and bizarre environmental destruction started.
1. "They were expendable."
2. Comment from the Editor.
1. "They were expendable."
From Archie Mazmanian:
This may serve as the headline of an obituary shortly as the current annihilation takes place. Assuming the MWRA introduced a gaggle of White Geese in the 1980s in the area of the BU Bridge - although there may have been an pre-existing gaggle - was the gig for that gaggle to improve water quality or to serve some other environmental purpose? Perhaps the services of the White Geese are no longer required. If such is the case, why not relocate the gaggle? The White Geese are not overrunning the area of the BU Bridge.
Today's Sunday NYTimes (9/6/09) includes a feature in its first section titled "Tick-Borne Illnesses Have Nantucket Considering Some Deer-Based Solutions" by Pam Belluch about that island's Lyme and other disease problems related to deer ticks. Deer were introduced to Nantucket and proliferated. A Boston Globe story on Block Island several years ago disclosed a similar situation there. A proposed solution was to reduce - not annihilate - the deer herd. Animal rights protestors have objected.
I mention this article to contrast the situation with the White Geese, who to my knowledge are not creating health problems for the adjoining community and have not innundated the area. In fact, the White Geese are being squeezed. The "people" behind this do not propose to slaughter the White Geese with abatoir techniques because of the anticipated response to such barbarism. Starving the beast provides these "people" with a clearer conscience. Besides, relocating them can be costly as well as difficult. These "people" are relying upon the fact that the gaggle is not that large. Few know of the plight of the White Geese as they have been squeezed out of the public's vision, as it is difficult for the gaggle to enjoy the waters of the Charles River. Out of sight, out of mind. There is a name for this when a minority of humans are involved.
The deer continue on Nantucket and Block Island, increasing in numbers, despite extended hunting seasons. The White Geese cause us no harm. Isn't there something wrong with this?
2. Comment from the Editor.
When I originally posted Archie's comments, I took the move comment in the vein I really think he meant it. On rethinking, some elaboration is needed.
Clearly the explanation of the Cambridge Pols for the outrage of heartless animal abuse EXACTLY fits Archie's analysis. To the extent these supposed humans deign to mention their behavior, the explanation translates as "These are the little guys. How dare you object to us destroying the little guys."
The Monteiro judge and jury were exposed to this mentality. $5 million damages, including $3.5 million penal.
“Reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
As far as moving goes, Friends of the White Geese have proposed moving and part of the vileness of Patrick's people is the fact that they have not been moved during what is supposed to be temporary work.
The Charles River White Geese should be allowed to return to their home of most of the last 30 years, Magazine Beach.
The outrageous starvation wall should be chopped down. The poisons being dumped on the fields at Magazine Beach by people, state and city, with contempt for the environment should be ended. The expensive poison drainage systems should be filled in since there should be no need for them. The Charles River White Geese should be allowed to return to their nesting area when the Charles River White Geese deem it necessary. The bizarre staging destruction should be removed and returned to nature. The staging should be under Memorial Drive. Plans to use Obama money to destroy hundreds of trees to the east and create another starvation initiative should destroyed. When the project has been completed with minimal environmental harm nature should be reinstated at the nesting area was in September 1999.
This would restore the status quo before the heartless animal abuse and bizarre environmental destruction started.
Saturday, September 05, 2009
Representative Walz covers her rear end
1. Representative Walz to defend the Charles before one of the Cambridge City Manager’s Groups.
2. The Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association, the actions it brags about.
3. Walz’ legislation.
4. Latest outrages.
5. Clarification.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Representative Walz to defend the Charles before one of the Cambridge City Manager’s Groups.
The following is the listing of item number 2 on the agenda for the Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association meeting on September 10.
2) State Rep. Marty Walz has requested an opportunity to update the neighborhood about new legislation she has filed for better protecting open space along the river, by including, among other things, shadow analysis and better protection of how construction along the Charles should maximize and preserve open space (this follows Marty's supporting the CNA's successful legislative work to have City Council pass other legislation to enlarge the Charles River buffer zone (area without development) along the Charles and within Cport.
2. The Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association, the actions it brags about.
The Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association was created at the request of the Cambridge City Manager. In its first organizing action, it “fought” a project going into the decommissioned Blessed Sacrament Church arguing it was too large. They had a victory. They made the project larger.
The “victory” they brag about on the Charles is the typical fake victory which is the norm from Cambridge Pols.
In, I believe, 2006, close friends of the leaders of this group, fellow members of the Cambridge Pols, destroyed zoning protections on the north side of Memorial Drive across from Magazine Beach and extending to Putnam Avenue. They lied that they were doing exactly the opposite and you have to read the fine print of this fake downzoning to realize exactly what it was.
The “leaders” of the two groups and many friends including at least one current city council member have spent the better part of the last decade destroying zoning protections in Cambridge with many zoning initiatives containing exactly the same sort of lies, lovely big letters, fine print which turned the big letters into nonsense.
Marilyn Wellons and I spoke against the 2006 outrage to the Cambridge City Council and attempted to get this group to stand up to this outrage, but the City Manager’s groups are very well established by now and, as good company unions, prevented organization by being in the way and doing nothing.
The lie that this outrage was protective was very quickly proven by a major expansion authorized for the Radisson Hotel across from Magazine Beach which exactly violated the protections that the authors claimed to be providing.
During the last year, the leaders of the CNA have PARTIALLY reinstated protections which they helped destroy, leaving very major destructive fine print in place.
They have since repeatedly bragged (as in the above) that this PARTIAL reinstatement of protections which they help destroy in the first place was an achievement.
3. Walz’ legislation.
The outrages going on on the Charles River and soon to come on the Charles River which Walz supports prove any "protective" legislation to be just so much lies.
But that is the way things are done in Cambridge, MA.
4. Latest outrages.
The group has kept their friends “neutral” on the latest outrages. They have passed on a key communication of mine to their mailing list.
5. Clarification.
I make no claim as to knowledge of what is in Representative Walz' legislation.
The reality is that, no matter how good it is, it cannot possibly neutralize the truly reprehensible (and I carefully use the judge's word) Representative Walz' behavior is.
Walz' hands are filthy rotten. Walz is flat dab in the middle of massive, irresponsible environmental destruction. Walz is a beligerant and heartless animal abuser as part of reprehensible projects which taken as a whole in meaningful reality and looking at the obvious and easy alternatives condemn her as a really vile person.
Her filing legislation and her running around with such legislation at such a time can only reasonably be interpreteted as her attempt to lie to her constituents that she is a decent human being.
We are way beyond the "have you no shame" level.
She has no redeeming value to anybody with respect for animals or to anybody who might be impressed with whatever her legislation claims to do.
I use the word "lie." I would be a damn fool not to.
2. The Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association, the actions it brags about.
3. Walz’ legislation.
4. Latest outrages.
5. Clarification.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Representative Walz to defend the Charles before one of the Cambridge City Manager’s Groups.
The following is the listing of item number 2 on the agenda for the Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association meeting on September 10.
2) State Rep. Marty Walz has requested an opportunity to update the neighborhood about new legislation she has filed for better protecting open space along the river, by including, among other things, shadow analysis and better protection of how construction along the Charles should maximize and preserve open space (this follows Marty's supporting the CNA's successful legislative work to have City Council pass other legislation to enlarge the Charles River buffer zone (area without development) along the Charles and within Cport.
2. The Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association, the actions it brags about.
The Cambridgeport Neighborhood Association was created at the request of the Cambridge City Manager. In its first organizing action, it “fought” a project going into the decommissioned Blessed Sacrament Church arguing it was too large. They had a victory. They made the project larger.
The “victory” they brag about on the Charles is the typical fake victory which is the norm from Cambridge Pols.
In, I believe, 2006, close friends of the leaders of this group, fellow members of the Cambridge Pols, destroyed zoning protections on the north side of Memorial Drive across from Magazine Beach and extending to Putnam Avenue. They lied that they were doing exactly the opposite and you have to read the fine print of this fake downzoning to realize exactly what it was.
The “leaders” of the two groups and many friends including at least one current city council member have spent the better part of the last decade destroying zoning protections in Cambridge with many zoning initiatives containing exactly the same sort of lies, lovely big letters, fine print which turned the big letters into nonsense.
Marilyn Wellons and I spoke against the 2006 outrage to the Cambridge City Council and attempted to get this group to stand up to this outrage, but the City Manager’s groups are very well established by now and, as good company unions, prevented organization by being in the way and doing nothing.
The lie that this outrage was protective was very quickly proven by a major expansion authorized for the Radisson Hotel across from Magazine Beach which exactly violated the protections that the authors claimed to be providing.
During the last year, the leaders of the CNA have PARTIALLY reinstated protections which they helped destroy, leaving very major destructive fine print in place.
They have since repeatedly bragged (as in the above) that this PARTIAL reinstatement of protections which they help destroy in the first place was an achievement.
3. Walz’ legislation.
The outrages going on on the Charles River and soon to come on the Charles River which Walz supports prove any "protective" legislation to be just so much lies.
But that is the way things are done in Cambridge, MA.
4. Latest outrages.
The group has kept their friends “neutral” on the latest outrages. They have passed on a key communication of mine to their mailing list.
5. Clarification.
I make no claim as to knowledge of what is in Representative Walz' legislation.
The reality is that, no matter how good it is, it cannot possibly neutralize the truly reprehensible (and I carefully use the judge's word) Representative Walz' behavior is.
Walz' hands are filthy rotten. Walz is flat dab in the middle of massive, irresponsible environmental destruction. Walz is a beligerant and heartless animal abuser as part of reprehensible projects which taken as a whole in meaningful reality and looking at the obvious and easy alternatives condemn her as a really vile person.
Her filing legislation and her running around with such legislation at such a time can only reasonably be interpreteted as her attempt to lie to her constituents that she is a decent human being.
We are way beyond the "have you no shame" level.
She has no redeeming value to anybody with respect for animals or to anybody who might be impressed with whatever her legislation claims to do.
I use the word "lie." I would be a damn fool not to.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Arthur Godfrey + Charles River White Geese
From Archie Mazmanian
*******
Some years back, Arthur Godfrey told a joke on his radio/tv show about a goose that got on a bus and by the time he got off several stops later, the goose was "peopled" six times.
I thought this joke was funny at the time. I recall there were complaints that the joke was too risque. I have thought of this joke over the years as the Charles River White Geese have been "peopled" not on the bus but in their natural habitat. While this joke may still be funny, what is happening to the White Geese is not. Consider the systematic steps taken over the years by the "people" in charge.
All seemed well with the White Geese back in the late '60s and '70s in their gathering along the Charles River shore in front of the Hyatt. At the time, sunbathers frequented that "beach" but made sure not to get too close to the White Geese who were very territorial. We had to keep our children under control so they wouldn't get hurt by the Geese protecting what they perceived as potential threats to their children, just as we humans protect our children. We all got along, the people and the White Geese.
When our children got older, they were more into sports, so we lost track of the White Geese. This Blog awakened me with its reports of how the White Geese were being "peopled" by government and non-profit entities. The growth planted along the northerly bank of the Charles River reduced the habitat of the White Geese, including in front of the Hyatt. But the White Geese survived this assault. Boston University's boathouse on the Cambridge side further reduced the habitat of the White Geese. But they survived that assault. The White Geese were confined to a small meadow between the BU boathouse and the BU Bridge. Of course, they had to cope with the Grand Junction Rail Line (GJRL), but only on a limited basis.
Then came the Urban Ring Phase 2 project that might utilize a widened GJRL for its 60-foot BRT buses running in each direction every 7 minutes or so. More recently, the BU Bridge repair projects have further threatened the White Geese as reported in this Blog. The White Geese are being annihilated by "people." That is obviously the goal of these "people."
It's time to "goose" these "people," expose them via the ballot box and any other means. This is cruelty. Most of these "people" are government officials and employees. What we need are whistleblowers, nay honkers, in government to expose this goal of annihilating the White Geese. If there is success with the White Geese, who's next in Mother Nature? Don't get mad, get even. Let's "goose" these "people" by naming them publicly. Have they no decency?
*********
Bob: The reference to white geese on the Charles River in the 60's and 70's is interesting because our understanding is that the current gaggle dates to 1981 and the original group to workers in the pollution control plant. Dangerousness is not in the makeup of the gaggle.
What is entirely possible is that our knowledge is based on the memory of a limited number of workers at the plant. Those workers maintained an excellent relationship with the Charles River White Geese and could monitor their well-being. The MWRA employees' work schedule was changed to part time and then to only periodic plant visits AFTER heartless animal abuse became State and City policy.
It is entirely possible that White Geese were living in the Hyatt area which is to the east of the current destroyed goose meadow and further east of the pollution plant/Magazine Beach.
I should think that the gaggles could have merged at some time.
*******
Some years back, Arthur Godfrey told a joke on his radio/tv show about a goose that got on a bus and by the time he got off several stops later, the goose was "peopled" six times.
I thought this joke was funny at the time. I recall there were complaints that the joke was too risque. I have thought of this joke over the years as the Charles River White Geese have been "peopled" not on the bus but in their natural habitat. While this joke may still be funny, what is happening to the White Geese is not. Consider the systematic steps taken over the years by the "people" in charge.
All seemed well with the White Geese back in the late '60s and '70s in their gathering along the Charles River shore in front of the Hyatt. At the time, sunbathers frequented that "beach" but made sure not to get too close to the White Geese who were very territorial. We had to keep our children under control so they wouldn't get hurt by the Geese protecting what they perceived as potential threats to their children, just as we humans protect our children. We all got along, the people and the White Geese.
When our children got older, they were more into sports, so we lost track of the White Geese. This Blog awakened me with its reports of how the White Geese were being "peopled" by government and non-profit entities. The growth planted along the northerly bank of the Charles River reduced the habitat of the White Geese, including in front of the Hyatt. But the White Geese survived this assault. Boston University's boathouse on the Cambridge side further reduced the habitat of the White Geese. But they survived that assault. The White Geese were confined to a small meadow between the BU boathouse and the BU Bridge. Of course, they had to cope with the Grand Junction Rail Line (GJRL), but only on a limited basis.
Then came the Urban Ring Phase 2 project that might utilize a widened GJRL for its 60-foot BRT buses running in each direction every 7 minutes or so. More recently, the BU Bridge repair projects have further threatened the White Geese as reported in this Blog. The White Geese are being annihilated by "people." That is obviously the goal of these "people."
It's time to "goose" these "people," expose them via the ballot box and any other means. This is cruelty. Most of these "people" are government officials and employees. What we need are whistleblowers, nay honkers, in government to expose this goal of annihilating the White Geese. If there is success with the White Geese, who's next in Mother Nature? Don't get mad, get even. Let's "goose" these "people" by naming them publicly. Have they no decency?
*********
Bob: The reference to white geese on the Charles River in the 60's and 70's is interesting because our understanding is that the current gaggle dates to 1981 and the original group to workers in the pollution control plant. Dangerousness is not in the makeup of the gaggle.
What is entirely possible is that our knowledge is based on the memory of a limited number of workers at the plant. Those workers maintained an excellent relationship with the Charles River White Geese and could monitor their well-being. The MWRA employees' work schedule was changed to part time and then to only periodic plant visits AFTER heartless animal abuse became State and City policy.
It is entirely possible that White Geese were living in the Hyatt area which is to the east of the current destroyed goose meadow and further east of the pollution plant/Magazine Beach.
I should think that the gaggles could have merged at some time.
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Day 376, Blogger praises environmental destruction, heartless animal abuse, neglects to mention the environmental destruction, heartless animal abuse
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. General.
2. Latest Outrage.
1. General.
In the late afternoon, early rush hour, Monday, August 31, 2009, I greeted people at the Destroyed Nesting Area.
The view of the outrage was quite clear from the sidewalk.
Pedestrians were interested and concerned. An increased number of drivers pulled over for leaflets.
2. Latest Outrage.
The bad guys in Cambridge tend to scratch each others' backs a lot.
When a member of the Cambridge Pols praises somebody, and you are pro-environment, look out for the guy getting praised.
The City of Cambridge’s Cambridgeport group runs a listserve on which I have been active. I have recently been amazed to see some of my more indignant posts get passed on to the list.
A few weeks ago, the head of the group issued glowing praise for a new blog which he said was given a link on their website.
Kathy Podgers asked to also be given a link for her blog. That request was copied to me by Kathy but was not passed on to the list.
Yesterday, I asked for a link to this blog. That request was passed on to the list.
My request read:
**********
Looking at the Cambridgeport blog you have praised so highly, I see an outrageous piece praising the ongoing Magazine Beach / Goose Meadow / Memorial Drive environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.
A semblance of neutrality would be to post a link to somebody pro-environment and opposed to heartless animal abuse, our blog, charlesriverwhitegeese.blogspot.com.
**********
Last Saturday, this blogger praised the outrage going on at Magazine Beach and the outrage associated with the BU Bridge repairs. The blogger neglected to mention the environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse. He did mention “bureaucratic infighting” with regard to the latter.
The blogger also commented on the plan to destroy hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive as a preservation project while mentioning that the plan is “controversial.”
The blogger responded off list yesterday that he “makes a strong effort to maintain neutrality.”
*********
My response to the blogger was:
"You praised an environmental destructive project.
"You praised heartless animal abuse.
"You neglected to mention the environmental destruction.
"You neglected to mention the heartless animal abuse.
"That is not neutral. That is false and misleading praise because the environmental destructiveness is so major.
"Praise of this sort is not neutral, it is part of a continuing con game in which a very destrucive city council and governor lie that they are pro environment, and with regard to their accelerating heartless animal abuse, propounds the lie that they are decent human beings."
********
I have long since stopped trying to read the mind of people taking initiatives destructive of the environment in Cambridge. I have long since stopped trying to figure out whether any individual is a knave or a fool.
With regard to this individual, his entry came after really outrageous behavior by environmental destroyers and heartless animal abusers, with no mention whatsoever of the outrages.
The entry as of the writing of this report is unchanged.
That says everything.
1. General.
2. Latest Outrage.
1. General.
In the late afternoon, early rush hour, Monday, August 31, 2009, I greeted people at the Destroyed Nesting Area.
The view of the outrage was quite clear from the sidewalk.
Pedestrians were interested and concerned. An increased number of drivers pulled over for leaflets.
2. Latest Outrage.
The bad guys in Cambridge tend to scratch each others' backs a lot.
When a member of the Cambridge Pols praises somebody, and you are pro-environment, look out for the guy getting praised.
The City of Cambridge’s Cambridgeport group runs a listserve on which I have been active. I have recently been amazed to see some of my more indignant posts get passed on to the list.
A few weeks ago, the head of the group issued glowing praise for a new blog which he said was given a link on their website.
Kathy Podgers asked to also be given a link for her blog. That request was copied to me by Kathy but was not passed on to the list.
Yesterday, I asked for a link to this blog. That request was passed on to the list.
My request read:
**********
Looking at the Cambridgeport blog you have praised so highly, I see an outrageous piece praising the ongoing Magazine Beach / Goose Meadow / Memorial Drive environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.
A semblance of neutrality would be to post a link to somebody pro-environment and opposed to heartless animal abuse, our blog, charlesriverwhitegeese.blogspot.com.
**********
Last Saturday, this blogger praised the outrage going on at Magazine Beach and the outrage associated with the BU Bridge repairs. The blogger neglected to mention the environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse. He did mention “bureaucratic infighting” with regard to the latter.
The blogger also commented on the plan to destroy hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive as a preservation project while mentioning that the plan is “controversial.”
The blogger responded off list yesterday that he “makes a strong effort to maintain neutrality.”
*********
My response to the blogger was:
"You praised an environmental destructive project.
"You praised heartless animal abuse.
"You neglected to mention the environmental destruction.
"You neglected to mention the heartless animal abuse.
"That is not neutral. That is false and misleading praise because the environmental destructiveness is so major.
"Praise of this sort is not neutral, it is part of a continuing con game in which a very destrucive city council and governor lie that they are pro environment, and with regard to their accelerating heartless animal abuse, propounds the lie that they are decent human beings."
********
I have long since stopped trying to read the mind of people taking initiatives destructive of the environment in Cambridge. I have long since stopped trying to figure out whether any individual is a knave or a fool.
With regard to this individual, his entry came after really outrageous behavior by environmental destroyers and heartless animal abusers, with no mention whatsoever of the outrages.
The entry as of the writing of this report is unchanged.
That says everything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)