1. Day 393 at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
2. I got Conned! Cambridge City Council votes for Tree Destruction.
A. Conned.
B. Destruction of trees praised by City Manager for Highway construction in Watertown voted by city council.
C. Vote to study street trees.
D. Seidel, Decker and Kelly on Raccoons.
Bob La Trémouille reports.
1. Day 393 at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
On Thursday, May 13, 2010, I conducted the 393d or more visibility at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
I was there before the rush hour so there was minimal pedestrian traffic. Vehicular traffic was incredible, a result of half of the lanes on the BU Bridge being closed.
2. I got Conned! Cambridge City Council votes for Tree Destruction.
A. Conned.
An operative for the Cambridge Machine heavily publicized the May 10, Cambridge City Council meeting, giving the impression that Councilor Cheung was protecting four street trees near Hoyt Field, which is about 2½ blocks from the Charles River.
I was minimally impressed when I saw the motion and realized that it was a study of whatever regulations exist with regard to street trees. I pointed out to her that big destruction by the City of Cambridge and its friends is being done to non street trees. A good cheerleader, she could not hear me and insisted this was a good start.
Kathy Podgers read the Chronicle report of Cambridge vote to destroy who knows how many trees in Watertown. She attempted to pass that report on as an addition to my report of a Yahoo report concerning the vote. The Chronicle report was on line, but did not make the hard copy as far as I have yet to be able to find.
The Chronicle front paged the vote to destroy all those trees in Watertown for construction a small vehicle highway by the state. The vote was 8 for, 0 opposed, and 1 something else. I am trying to get details on the something else.
The reality is that the street tree study is exactly the opposite of a good start since it follows a meaningful vote for tree destruction.
B. Destruction of trees praised by City Manager for Highway construction in Watertown voted by city council.
Kathy Podgers has wisely pointed out the Chronicle report on the meeting the previous Monday meeting which may be found at: http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1560851973/Cambridge-OKs-state-bike-path-plan. It was front paged.
The city manager is quoted as justifying giving the DCR an easement over Cambridge controlled property in Watertown. He minimizes the importance on the basis that there are a bunch of trees there which would be destroyed by the proposed small vehicle highway.
So the City Council knowingly voted to destroy the trees.
Kathy Podgers comments: “Apparently, one hand gives, while the other hand takes away... “ and she quotes the Chronicle quote of Healy:
*******
“The easement will ensure the long-term benefits of this portion of the bicycle/pedestrian path,” Healy wrote. “Aside from the recreational benefit, the proposed benefits to the city will include DCR clearing the extensive tree growth in that area and paving it to protect the water line from further root damage and from future tree growth over the water line.”
*******
A similar situation exists on Memorial Drive. A grove of about 104 excellent trees currently has reached a very beautiful maturity at the western end of the Memorial Drive split. This is a couple blocks east of the Hyatt.
One of the Machine’s beloved highways would decimate that grove. Those, for the most part, are not street trees. They are an excellent grove on the banks of the Charles River.
And the city council is emphasizing a STUDY of STREET trees while voting to destroy trees on Cambridge land in Watertown for another small vehicle highway. And somehow, even though they vote for destruction of city trees not on streets, the city councl cannot understand there are other trees that street trees under threat from government?
The exact language of the votes is reported above at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/cambridge-ma-city-council-votes-on.html.
C. Vote to study street trees.
Cambridge has a new City Councilor, Leland Cheung.
He submitted a motion to look into the procedure for destroying STREET trees in Cambridge. His motion has no concern for the destruction of publicly owned trees, no matter how excellent, which are not street trees.
We cannot say whether or not his study would get into the planned destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive before they are destroyed in the same manner as the Cambridge trees.
Clearly, it would not impact the trees in Watertown that the city council voted to destroy, would not impact the planned destruction of the Alewife reservation, the ongoing destruction of apparently thousands of trees at Fresh Pond, the dumping of poisons at Magazine Beach, the walling off of Magazine Beach, the ongoing and heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese or the ongoing destruction of all animals living or visiting the first ten miles of the Charles River.
From my point of view, I can see no possibility of the City of Cambridge becoming meaningfully responsible on environmental matters without firing the current City Manager and gutting The Cambridge Machine. You can add to that a similar problem with regard to Civil Rights, and you can keep on going. There are a lot of problems which simply stink, and the middle of the apparent stink has to be the core of the government.
Mr. Cheung’s motion passed without negative vote. I am checking to see if he is the person who voted something other than for or against the destruction of the Cambridge owned trees in Watertown which are being replaced with lovely paving.
D. Seidel, Decker and Kelly on Raccoons.
By contrast, there was an interesting interchange among three Machine members or beneficiaries, Seidel, Decker and Kelly.
Seidel and Decker are clearly destructive. Kelly tries to give the opposite impression.
This exchange follows on another vote last week in which a UNANIMOUS city council voted to attack raccoons in Squirrel Brand park.
The exchange among the three concerned raccoons. This exchange could be another con game from the three of them, Kelly, Seidel and Decker, trying to make Kelly look good. The three of them could consider Leland Cheung a threat, especially if Cheung, not a Machine product, turns out to be for real.
After apparently voting for this outrage, Kelley is trying to show himself as responsible on animal matters.
Seidel and Decker expressed concern that kids could get poisoned from eating the feces of raccoons.
Eight member of the city council are dumping poisons on Magazine Beach for kids to roll in and Seidel and Decker are trying to protect kids from being poisoned by eating excrement???
