1. General.
2. Sainthood claims, as usual, are bizarre.
A. General.
B. Alewife.
C. Magazine Beach to BU Boathouse.
(1) Work at Magazine Beach Unnecessary.
(2) Poisons dumped to keep alive sickly grass planted in place of environmentally responsible grass which was destroyed.
(3) Playing fields destroyed to drain off poisons which should not be dumped in the first place.
(4) Bizarre wall of bushes replaces wetlands, starves Charles River White Geese.
(5) Boat dock apparently destroyed.
(6) Transition area designed to provide additional barriers to access from the Charles to Magazine Beach.
(7) Almost all ground vegetation destroyed from BU Bridge to BU Boathouse.
(8) Food in area across from Hyatt barred to Charles River White Geese at same time as use of Magazine Beach taken.
(9) BU Bridge repairs needlessly destructive. DCR refuses to ameliorate harm to Charles River White Geese.
(10) DCR plans to destroy picnic area south of Magazine Street.
D. Massive Tree Destruction Planned, Memorial Drive, Magazine Beach to Longfellow Bridge
E. Greenough Boulevard.
F. Herter Park area.
G. Dumping of Poisons near Mass. General. Annual infestation of algae caused.
H. Poisoning of the Eggs of Migratory Waterfowl.
I. Protective vegetation in general.
J. Nonantum Road.
K. Other locations.
3. Connectivity Plans could be acceptable, include one commendable part.
A. Good parts.
(1) Rejects New Highway.
(2) Western Avenue / Arsenal Street Bridge Area.
B. Inferior parts.
(1) Greenough Boulevard between Arsenal Street and North Harvard Street.
(A) Naming.
(B) Greenough Boulevard.
(2) Greenough Boulevard / North Beacon Street intersection.
(A) Naming.
(B) The intersection.
4. Formal response.
1. General.
The Charles River Connectivity Report, as presented at the October 13, 2011 meeting on Nonantum Road has at lease one aspect which is downright commendable. Overall, with care, the study could result in responsible behavior.
The meeting was severely marred, however, by Manager A’s responding to my comments on existing animal and past animal abuse with my hope that the report not segue into future animal abuse.
I really do not want to go through yet another attack on the Department of Conservation and Recreation but it is unavoidable. Section 2 is that, hopefully as concise as possible. Should I, in my attempts at concise presentation inadvertently omit something, the omission is not deliberate.
Section 3 is my report on the meeting.
Section 4 is my formal submission at the meeting, names of the guilty redacted.
2. Sainthood claims, as usual, are bizarre.
A. General.
In response to objections I will go ahead with later, Manager A denied that the DCR has been doing any harm to animals.
As I recall, the denial was past tense. Manager A is key
Manager A was responding to my comment on Greenough Boulevard.
I responded to his claims of sainthood that the DCR’s plans for the Charles River call for parks.
The DCR’s secret definition of parks is no resident animals.
But this is yet another excellent example of pretty much non stop lies, and you can only respond to so much outrageous comments. He made further comments while I was very visibly writing up my written comments and transcribing them onto my laptop. I did not dignify his further comments with further response.
As with so many of the Cambridge City Manager’s “protective” groups, “You can’t possibly be that stupid.”
The DCR and their fellow travelers brag of seeing a lot of animals. They do not state that many of the “sightings” are of animals which are pretty much unthinkable on the Charles River Basin. Others, such a migratory waterfowl, are animals they are determined to get rid of and actively working to get rid of and that determination is implied in the statement.
Their stated goal, once you get through the secret definitions, is to kill off all resident animals. And they are working constantly toward that goal.
B. Alewife.
Past tense, as I said was key.
The plans here are for massive and heartless killing of resident animals unless they are able to escape massive and very destructive machines.
The plans are flatly and simply bizarre because they admit when questioned that the destruction cannot achieve its stated goals and because there is a readily available alternative which can achieve those goals without environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.
Alewife is subject to flood because Cambridge has allowed so much of the watershed to be destroyed.
Alewife has seen two storms in the past twenty years equal to the worst storms expected in any fifty year period.
The “solution”: massive destruction of an excellent virgin forest and its wildlife to achieve protection against TWO YEAR STORMS.
The problem is flooding. They are protecting against moderately bad rainstorms.
Directly across Cambridge Park Drive and visible from the initial destruction area is a massive parking lot which extends to railroad tracks to the south and Alewife Brook Parkway to the east.
This parking lot could be dug up and turned into the necessary massive tanks to catch flood waters and release those flood waters in a responsible matter.
The nearest part of the parking lot was slated for development before the market crash.
It would be readily achievable to take the parking lots by eminent domain and build the building on air rights about the flood storage. But those parking lots will readily disappear under the current plans.
C. Magazine Beach to BU Boathouse.
Heartless starving of the Charles River White Geese by denying them access to their food at Magazine Beach by the introduction of the bizarre bushes very clearly is “harm.” Manager A’s associate, Manager B, the local manager, has bragged of starving the Charles River White Geese. Their names were provided in the unredacted comment reported in section 4, below.
(1) Work at Magazine Beach Unnecessary.
Throughout the build up for the massive destruction, normal humans looking at Magazine Beach clearly were of the opinion that there was no need to “improve” it, some possible need to the west but not in Magazine Beach proper.
The “improvements” which have occurred are things which could have been done without the massive destruction and heartless animal abuse.
(2) Poisons dumped to keep alive sickly grass planted in place of environmentally responsible grass which was destroyed.
Native grasses which survived the better part of a century without poisons being dumped on them were casually destroyed, seven acres of them.
The grasses introduced in place of the healthy grasses killed off are so blatantly inappropriate that they cannot survive without poisons to keep them going.
Naturally, the poisons poison waterfowl feeding off them.
(3) Playing fields destroyed to drain off poisons which should not be dumped in the first place.
They are dumping poisons to keep alive the sickly grasses which are unfit for the location. To keep the sickly stuff alive and keep the poisons out of the Charles River, they have destroyed playing fields for drainage.
They replace the poisons with seeds for the healthy grass they irresponsibly destroyed. They return the healthy grasses, they can return the drainage system to playing fields.
(4) Bizarre wall of bushes replaces wetlands, starves Charles River White Geese.
The “planners” claimed there was a water problem. Translation: it was wetlands.
Nature and humans coexisted on Magazine Beach for the better part of a century. Those wetlands were crucial transition between the playing fields and the Charles River.
The DCR claims they want water related activities.
The work at Magazine Beach was delayed years because their wall of fancy bushes kept dying. It died because their “native” bushes were unfit for the Charles River. Once they got something which would survive, they simply let it grow.
Everyplace else on the Charles River Basin, bordering vegetation is killed off / chopped down twice a year, to the great harm of migratory waterfowl.
At Magazine Beach, that bizarre wall keeps growing, and starving the Charles River White Geese who lived on Magazine Beach for the better part of the last 30 years, feeding off the grasses and sleeping there at night.
Manager B has bragged that the wall starves the Charles River White Geese.
And the DCR brags that they want water related activities when they are barring access between water and playing fields for humans and animals?
Chop it down. The native vegetation they destroyed there has shown signs of returning anyway.
That native vegetation which was a target of the wetlands destruction was mentioned by the Boston Conservation Commission when they objected to the DCR / fake conservancy’s destruction. The BCC was concerned about their blatant contempt for the needs of migratory waterfowl.
(5) Boat dock apparently destroyed.
The DCR claims they want water related uses. A boat landing was at Magazine Beach for the better part of a century.
It is still there, but you can’t get at it. Access to back up cars is clearly blocked.
(6) Transition area designed to provide additional barriers to access from the Charles to Magazine Beach.
There is very much a line of barriers which has been created inside the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation.
(7) Almost all ground vegetation destroyed from BU Bridge to BU Boathouse.
Starting in 2003 when the fake conversancy commenced environmental destruction for the DCR, ground vegetation began being destroyed.
The vegetation that was destroyed can readily be observed in the lush hillside holding up Memorial Drive and its off ramp to the north of the animal habitat. That vegetation is lush and the ground vegetation used to exactly that lush.
The small areas which were not destroyed by the fake conservancy or by the much too large BU Bridge construction area is just as lush, but there is very little of it.
(8) Food in area across from Hyatt barred to Charles River White Geese at same time as use of Magazine Beach taken.
At the same time as the DCR walled off Magazine Beach from the Charles River, the DCR’s accomplices at Cambridge did a “sewage control project” across from the Hyatt.
When they left, they left a wall of plastic barring access to the grasses on the river bank from the river.
(9) BU Bridge repairs needlessly destructive. DCR refuses to ameliorate harm to Charles River White Geese.
The BU Bridge repairs needed access from underneath. That portion of the destruction was necessary.
The DCR’s plans included a massive parking lot sticking into the animal habitat and excellent vegetation along the northern side under the on ramp to Memorial Drive. That was totally unnecessary and cruel.
The access area and parking lot continues to this day to be barred to animals.
DCR refused to ameliorate harm to the Charles River White Geese.
Why?
Their plans are to kill off all resident animals since their plans are to kill off all resident animals, they have no need to avoid utter cruelty.
A responsible entity would have allowed them to return to Magazine Beach, chop down the bizarre wall, replace the sickly grass and its poisons with the environmentally responsible grass they destroyed.
(10) DCR plans to destroy picnic area south of Magazine Street.
This is a location used by the little guy for barbeques. They are just going to take out the access openings and tiny parking lot. No explanation. The riffraff is offensive to them.
D. Massive Tree Destruction Planned, Memorial Drive, Magazine Beach to Longfellow Bridge
Cambridge and the DCR are working to destroy hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge. This includes devastation of an excellent grove of 105 trees at the Memorial Drive split. I have twice posted photos of these trees, in winter and in late summer.
The DCR has been lying that these trees are diseases. The diseased trees were destroyed more than five years ago. The DCR’s filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission confirmed the health of these trees.
Using that lie, they tried to get Obama moneys, but did not succeed. It is possible that Governor Patrick blocked the Obama moneys when he received documentation of the lie.
It is possible that this destruction is being sneaked into the state budget.
E. Greenough Boulevard.
Please see my comments below in section 3.B.(1).
F. Herter Park area.
Herter Park is located between Soldiers Field Road and the Charles River at the end of Everett Street. Everett Street is the traditional dividing line between Boston’s Allston and Brighton neighborhoods. It is near the WBZ studios and across from a medium height hotel whose name has changed a number of times. It is between the Elliot Bridge and the Arsenal Street Bridge.
Herter Park has been subjected to massive destruction of animal areas during the past decade.
G. Dumping of Poisons near Mass. General. Annual infestation of algae caused.
The dumping of poisons on the playing fields at Magazine Beach copies environmental destruction at playing fields across Storrow Drive / Soldiers Field Road / Charles Street from Massachusetts General Hospital.
At these playing fields, the DCR figured their favored poisons were not sufficiently destructive. So they dumped poisons marked with a prohibition against use near water.
THE NEXT DAY, the Charles River was dead from the Charles River Dam to the Mass. Avenue (Harvard) Bridge, choked with algae.
Last I heard the algae infestation returns annually now.
H. Poisoning of the Eggs of Migratory Waterfowl.
In 2003, the DCR started poisoning the eggs of as much migratory waterfowl as it could get away with. I am not aware that the poisonings have stopped.
Their agent has been the falsely named “Charles River Conservancy.”
I. Protective vegetation in general.
Massive destruction throughout the Charles River Basin commencing during the past ten years. The only bordering vegetation which is not destroyed twice a year is the bizarre, destructive stuff introduced at Magazine Beach since 2004. And that is very clearly left there to starve the Charles River White Geese.
The entity doing the destruction is, once again, the falsely named “Charles River Conservancy.”
I have sat through a meeting of the Boston Conservation Commission in which members of the Boston Conservation Commission were disgusted at the destructiveness of the “Charles River Conservancy” on the Boston side of the Charles River.
J. Nonantum Road.
I have gone into detail as to why this entity is really Soldiers Field Road.
That monstrous boathouse where the meeting was conducted is an outrage.
K. Other locations.
I have received quite distressed communications concerned wildlife on the Mystic River.
In any case, this communication has been prepared, for the most part, off the top of my head. It is highly likely there are omissions.
3. Connectivity Plans could be acceptable, include one commendable part.
It is a shame that a pretty good report was sullied by the blatant falsehoods of sainthood on treatment of animals.
The report is on how the various properties on the Charles River Basin interrelate.
The Nonantum Road meeting was pretty much limited to the Elliot Bridge (west of Harvard Stadium, large formal interchange connecting to Fresh Pond Parkway) and west. Tuesday’s Cambridge meeting was announced to be concerned with east of the Elliot Bridge. A meeting the prior Tuesday at the Shriner’s Burn Center presumably concerned areas farthest to the east but they did not specify.
A. Good parts.
(1) Rejects New Highway.
The report rejects the concept of a new highway in and abutting the Charles River pretty much throughout Cambridge. Manager A referred to that in response to my comment as the Cambridge proposal.
(2) Western Avenue / Arsenal Street Bridge Area.
The report accurately states that the interchange is bad between Western Avenue, the Arsenal Street Bridge and Soldier’s Field Road.
B. Inferior parts.
I say inferior because, except for the bizarre claim of sainthood in response to my Greenough Boulevard discussion, it is really not particularly bad.
(1) Greenough Boulevard between Arsenal Street and North Harvard Street.
(A) Naming.
Massachusetts traffic planners maximize confusion and thus accidents by drivers by any number of incompetent traffic actions. One of those excellent examples of incompetence is the arbitrary changing of names of what are very frequently the same road.
Greenough Boulevard is Memorial Drive with a name change. The name changes at Fresh Pond Parkway / the Elliot Bridge.
(B) Greenough Boulevard.
The sidewalks and bike paths in this area are not fancy. This area has much less traffic than Memorial Drive. There really is not a great deal of need to spend a bunch of money on this area. It is quite fine the way it is.
Work in the past decade emphasized the DCR’s contempt for wildlife.
Hell’s Half Acre is to the most part a former animal habitat just west of the Elliot Bridge across from Buckingham, Brown and Nichols School. The DCR devastated the portion of Hell’s Half Acre nearest the river during their environmental destructions of the past decade. The DCR devastated wildlife areas to the west of Hell’s Half Acre running to Arsenal Street by scorched earth development of what had been excellent ground cover.
I objected to the Greenough Boulevard plans because change is really not necessary and because change would probably wipe out too many of what few free animals they did not kill off or drive away during the destruction in the past ten years. If they can do the changes with no impact on the environmental areas, fine, but the DCR has no reason to be trusted. Plus, it is not really needed and their record is too extremely bad.
(2) Greenough Boulevard / North Beacon Street intersection.
(A) Naming.
The stretch of Greenough Boulevard between Arsenal Street and North Beacon Street reemphasizes the determination of traffic planners to maximize accidents by confusing drivers.
There is no meaningful connection between the two segments of Greenough Avenue. They both connect with Arsenal Street but the connections are several hundred feet apart.
If Massachusetts had responsible traffic planners, the Arsenal - North Beacon segment would be named Greenough Avenue and the Elliot Bridge - Arsenal segment would be named Memorial Drive.
(B) The intersection.
The Greenough Boulevard - North Beacon Street intersection is an excellent example of how traffic gets lazier and lazier the further west you go.
Arsenal Street is a nightmare in rush hour and frequently outside of rush hour. Soldiers Field Road at the rotary between Soldiers Field Road and North Beacon Street and Nonantum Road is a nightmare in rush hour.
The corresponding section of Greenough Boulevard is quiet and its intersection with North Beacon Street is quiet.
The planners are proposing a traffic light. It seems a waste of money. A man followed my comments with reasonable sounding comments in favor of the traffic light. I really did not understand the comments. It just looks to me like a fairly quiet intersection which really does not need the added interference to traffic flow, not to mention the expenditure of funds.
4. Formal response.
I left the following written comment. This transcription was made on my computer from the writing during the presentation. A brief review of section 2 will clearly indicate that this comment was too kind, very much too kind.
******
I strongly object to the blatant falsehood by [Manager A]:
His denial of doing any harm to animals. You have been deliberately starving the Charles River White Geese. [Manager B] has bragged of it in a public meeting.
The bizarre wall of introduced bushes at Magazine Beach is the only bordering vegetation which is not destroyed twice a year.
You claimed water based uses and have walled off Magazine Beach without meaningful explanation other than deliberate heartless starvation.
You add that to that the destruction of nearly all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and BU Boathouse, the only part of their habitat you have not taken away.
