Bob Reports:
Still catching up.
The following was printed in the April 23, 2009, Cambridge Chronicle.
The document from a Cambridge City Councilor to which the letter refers was written by Samuel Seidel. It is published on this blog at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2007_05_29_archive.html.
**********
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
I, with regret, have become quite skeptical of organizations and pols which call themselves “environmental” in Cambridge .
I know that I have been publicly mocked by one key Cambridge pol because I have the temerity to believe in the world’s definition of “environmentalism”. Cambridge pols, he said, have a better definition.
A letter in this week's Chronicle praises Representative Wolf on "environmental" grounds, including praise for protecting our scenic parkways and bridges.
I do not consider destruction of the Green maintenance at Magazine Beach for replacement with maintenance with herbicides to be something worthy of environmental commendation. These poisons are destructive to water fowl and not helpful to humans.
I do not consider the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation blocking access between Magazine Beach and the river to be anything other than what the key DCR bureaucrat has bragged of: a tool to starve the local waterfowl.
I see code words for protecting the environmentally reprehensible Department of Conservation and Recreation which, along with Cambridge and its pols, is destroying all animals living on or visiting the Charles River between the Watertown Dam and the harbor.
The DCR annually poisons as much waterfowl eggs as it can get away with. Twice a year, the DCR destroys all protective vegetation for migrating birds, except for the bizarre starvation wall at Magazine Beach .
The DCR seems to toss in as much animal harm as it can get away with in its projects. The BU Bridge repairs destroy key ground vegetation for staging that should go under Memorial Drive . The project completes total destruction of ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse which has been done in stages starting in 2004.
The “protection of bridges” has included addition of light pollution on three Charles River bridges.
The DCR, Cambridge, and Cambridge pols are involved in heartless animal abuse directed at the Charles River White Geese.
Sounds to me like the definition of environmentalism being used is the 19th Century of environmentalism: destroy, destroy, destroy, and make it look good.
You add to that the apparent plans to remove the playing fields at Magazine Beach from general public use. Neighborhood kids trying to use at least one Russell Field playing field have been chased off by the police for not getting prior city permission. This same “improvement” is scheduled to be implemented at Magazine Beach .
I am not happy.
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Destroy Alewife and Save Silver Maple? Bad idea.
Bob reports:
I have been remiss in reporting published letters.
The following letter was printed in the Cambridge Chronicle on April 9, 2009. I had previously commented in these pages that I thought the Chronicle had decided not to print the letter to which I was responding.
They printed. I responded. The Chronicle published.
***********
Well meaning folks wrote a letter opposing destruction of the PRIVATELY OWNED Silver Maple Forest but supporting destruction of the PUBLICLY OWNED Alewife Reservation a hundred feet or so from Silver Maple.
A cynical reader could react that the writers’ support of environmental destruction a few feet from Silver Maple which they want protected proves the writers to be opponents of affordable housing.
Such a reaction does not reflect the singular treatment good people are subjected to when they try to protect the environment in or near the City of Cambridge.
You see, Cambridge’s extremely destructive City Manager has a massive organization which descends on good people who try to protect the environment. Techniques frequently include deceptive statements, lies, misstatements, and key omissions.
It is quite certain that the operatives did not tell these decent people a number of things.
First, there is a very reasonable alternative to destruction of the Alewife reservation. Destruction of the Alewife Reservation is for flood storage. The reasonable place for the flood storage is under the large parking lot about 500 feet south of Alewife, just north of the railroad tracks. That owner is considering developing.
Secondly, the proposed destruction comes from a government which is flat out reprehensible on environmental issues.
The support of destruction of the Alewife Reservation by these good people has a qualifier based on a third common game. The operatives commonly talk about due process and lovely reviews. They do not tell who the “reviewers” are.
The letter mentions some sort of committee. The good people who wrote the letter would never be told that the committee is appointed by the key destroyer, and they would not be told the dangers to people appointed by the Cambridge City Manager who stand up to the Cambridge City Manager.
A jury recently considered the treatment by the Cambridge City Manager of a black woman department head who had the nerve to file a civil rights action. Malvina Monteiro, according to the jury, had her life destroyed in retaliation. The jury awarded $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The judge is considering the verdict and hopefully will change it to firing the city manager without pension.
But we have decent people fooled into an irresponsible statement.
I have sympathy for those good people and for saving the environment which is our mutual concern. I have great lack of respect for the bad people who fooled these good people into a silly, destructive statement.
I have been remiss in reporting published letters.
The following letter was printed in the Cambridge Chronicle on April 9, 2009. I had previously commented in these pages that I thought the Chronicle had decided not to print the letter to which I was responding.
They printed. I responded. The Chronicle published.
***********
Well meaning folks wrote a letter opposing destruction of the PRIVATELY OWNED Silver Maple Forest but supporting destruction of the PUBLICLY OWNED Alewife Reservation a hundred feet or so from Silver Maple.
A cynical reader could react that the writers’ support of environmental destruction a few feet from Silver Maple which they want protected proves the writers to be opponents of affordable housing.
Such a reaction does not reflect the singular treatment good people are subjected to when they try to protect the environment in or near the City of Cambridge.
You see, Cambridge’s extremely destructive City Manager has a massive organization which descends on good people who try to protect the environment. Techniques frequently include deceptive statements, lies, misstatements, and key omissions.
It is quite certain that the operatives did not tell these decent people a number of things.
First, there is a very reasonable alternative to destruction of the Alewife reservation. Destruction of the Alewife Reservation is for flood storage. The reasonable place for the flood storage is under the large parking lot about 500 feet south of Alewife, just north of the railroad tracks. That owner is considering developing.
Secondly, the proposed destruction comes from a government which is flat out reprehensible on environmental issues.
The support of destruction of the Alewife Reservation by these good people has a qualifier based on a third common game. The operatives commonly talk about due process and lovely reviews. They do not tell who the “reviewers” are.
The letter mentions some sort of committee. The good people who wrote the letter would never be told that the committee is appointed by the key destroyer, and they would not be told the dangers to people appointed by the Cambridge City Manager who stand up to the Cambridge City Manager.
A jury recently considered the treatment by the Cambridge City Manager of a black woman department head who had the nerve to file a civil rights action. Malvina Monteiro, according to the jury, had her life destroyed in retaliation. The jury awarded $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The judge is considering the verdict and hopefully will change it to firing the city manager without pension.
But we have decent people fooled into an irresponsible statement.
I have sympathy for those good people and for saving the environment which is our mutual concern. I have great lack of respect for the bad people who fooled these good people into a silly, destructive statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)