1. General.
2. Destruction at the Destroyed Nesting Area.
3. Destruction at Magazine Beach, General.
4. 2004, initial starvation.
5. The Canadas, the poisoning of eggs, the “Charles River Master Plan.”
6. The sewer project across from the Hyatt.
7. Alternate food sources.
8. The boat dock area.
9. Photos.
1. General.
One thing that normal human beings all agreed on was that there was nothing wrong at Magazine Beach.
So naturally, Cambridge and MA destroyed it.
The Charles River White Geese have lived for 30 years in a mile long habitat on the Charles River centered on the BU Bridge.
They spent most of the year at Magazine Beach feeding off the grasses there, beloved by all normal people.
During bad weather and the spring, they lived in their nesting area just to the east of the BU Bridge. I have recently posted photos of that outrage. They went to the nesting area to mate and raise their babies.
2. Destruction at the Destroyed Nesting Area.
I have recently provided photos of the latest destruction.
First destruction of the Nesting Area occurred in October 1999. It started the morning before a Cambridge Conservation Commission meeting to discuss the destruction proposed. It was completed before the earliest date work could be completed.
The work in October 1999 was done by Boston University who proceeded to lie that they had nothing to do with the destruction until they were condemned for their lawlessness by the Cambridge Conservation Commission six months later. Then BU blamed six months of lies of their president’s secretary who was not fired.
BU acting for MA entered into an urban wild area and destroyed it.
MA called the destruction a gift. The work was totally illegal. NO AGREEMENTS WERE SIGNED.
The destroyed nesting area was a wild ecosystem in the middle of the city. It was block off by fences from public access.
The fences were broken in two places.
At the corner of the BU Bridge and the ramp to Memorial Drive, a concrete ramp and stairs replaced the wild area.
At the eastern end of that access ramp, a staircase was dug into the wild hillside.
Until then, the nesting area was filled with protective ground vegetation.
The protective ground vegetation was destroyed en mass and replace with silly grass and a winding black stone covered walkway. Animals homes were casually destroyed
This “improvement” was almost totally unused by humans. The “improvements” steadily washed into the Charles.
The only major users were the Charles River White Geese. A video of the area in spring 2000 is posted at
Routinely friends of MA and Cambridge went through the Destroyed Nesting Area destroying nests. Mother Geese who defended their nests were frequently killed and carried away.
The vegetation destroyed regrew. Earth renewed itself.
In 2003, MA contracted with the Charles River Conservancy for environmental destructions services on the Charles River.
Since 2003, almost all the ground vegetation in the Destroyed Nesting Area has been destroyed again. The only exceptions were two tiny patches: (1) abutting the eastern area of the totally unnecessary east leg of the BU Bridge repair destruction and (2) abutting the southern end of the needed access area for BU Bridge repairs.
Protective vegetation in the eastern part of the area, beyond the Grand Junction tracks was totally destroyed.
None of this destruction has regrown, indicating deliberate poisoning, although there has been expansion of the tiny area left around the BU Bridge Construction.
Details on the damage done in the BU Bridge repair project were recently provided with photos at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/photo-record-september-2011-destruction.html.
3. Destruction at Magazine Beach, General.
Initial funding of $1.5 million for destruction at Magazine Beach was voted by the Cambridge City Council in December 1999.
Flat out lies have been normal. The most important lie, constantly repeated was that MA had no intention to “harm” the Charles River White Geese. It developed that “harm” had a secret definition. Starving them and destroying their home is not included in the definition of “harm.”
During the first season after the destruction of the nesting area, this outrage got major publicity. The flat out lies of no intent to harm quieted the publicity.
Cambridge and MA have played games with money which has shifted from one pot to another to allow the parties to lie that the worst was done by MA.
4. 2004, initial starvation.
In 2004, the wetlands bordering the Charles River were destroyed and the Charles River White were barred from their food of thirty years. They went from being almost totally self-sufficient to being totally fed by responsible human beings protecting them from a highly irresponsible city and state.
The wetlands were first walled off. Then they were dug up and a series of introduced bushes were attempted to be grown. They all died until MA finally found something which would grow.
MA and the Charles River Conservancy destroys all bordering vegetation on the Charles River twice a year. I have seen the Boston Conservation Commission shocked at the harm done by their practices to migrating waterfowl.
Now the only bordering vegetation not grown is the bizarre wall of introduced bushes blocking off Magazine Beach from the Charles River. The MA manager has bragged that this wall starves the Charles River White Geese.
The Charles River Conservancy conducted a swim in during the early days of the work to brag that this outrage would help swimming in the Charles River.
So playing fields which abutted the Charles in which nature and humans survived together for the mutual benefit of all have been blocked off to the principal resident.
5. The Canadas, the poisoning of eggs, the “Charles River Master Plan.”
Small numbers of Canadas returned to feed. The Charles River Conservancy started poisoning their eggs for MA in 2003.
I attended a “public meeting” before the poisoning started. I disputed the flat out lie that the Canadas were a problem. I was thrown out of the meeting. They would not allow discussion of whether there was a problem. The meeting was called solely to discuss the resolution of a problem which did not exist and which they would not discuss.
One of the key lies in the “Charles River Master Plan” was that Magazine Beach would consist of a lawn to the river.
After Cambridge and MA walled off the river, MA changed the Charles River Master Plan.
6. The sewer project across from the Hyatt.
Coordinated with the destruction at Magazine Beach was a sewer project by Cambridge across from the Hyatt Regency Hotel.
MA and Cambridge plans call for the destruction of hundreds of excellent trees between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge, the second bridge east of the BU Bridge which is in turn between Magazine Beach and the Destroyed Nesting Area.
The sewer project started the destruction of trees, wiping out a number of excellent trees across from the Hyatt Regency Hotel.
Cambridge completed the project by walling of the riverbanks across from the Hyatt from the river.
So simultaneously, all their traditional food was taken from the Charles River White Geese, both at Magazine Beach and across from the Hyatt.
7. Alternate food sources.
The area to the east of the Hyatt riverbanks is a sea wall.
The area to the west of the playing fields is a steep hill. They considered it and gave up on it.
The Boston side is in heavy public use east of the BU Bridge and is steep west of the BU Bridge.
Plus, if they had tried to use the publicly used area, they would have been killed off as pests.
7.. Destruction of native grass and replacement with poisons.
In 2007, MA and Cambridge dug up seven acres of perfectly good grass and replaced it with grass and poisons. The poisons are “needed” because the introduced grass would die without poisons. The stuff they destroyed lived the better part of a century without poisons.
Large parts of Magazine Beach’s playing fields have been destroyed for an expensive drainage system to drain off poisons which should not even be dumped there.
The lie given to the Cambridge City Council when the money was voted for the project was “improvement” of the playing area. NO IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE WHICH COULD NOT HAVE BEEN DONE WITHOUT the massive destruction which has occurred.
The playing fields being “improved” have been vastly decreased in size to drain off poisons to keep alive sickly grass introduced in place of grass which did not need poisons to survive.
8. The boat dock area.
The eastern end of Magazine Beach next to a sewerage treatment plant was a parking lot.
In the 2007 destruction, the parking lot was rearranged with destruction of trees.
The 2004 destruction continued the boat dock which had been there the better part of a century and installed a silly artificial lagoon which the Charles River White Geese loved.
Until the 2004 destruction, the Charles River White Geese slept at Magazine Beach.
The geese returned after the destruction through the opening for the boats. They carefully worked their way out into a tiny area where they fed until humans and dogs came.
The 2007 destruction filled in the lagoon while continuing a bridge which had been built about it for access to the boat dock.
The boat dock is still there but barriers have been placed for access to the boat docks. So totally access to the Charles River has been destroyed at Magazine Beach by MA and Cambridge loudly proclaiming that the projects on the Charles are water oriented.
Further barriers have been placed discouraging access to the grasses to the Charles River White Geese.
9. Photos.
I have rambled long enough.
Photos will follow.
