On their misleadingly named blog page, with a date of June 26, 2012, the Cambridge Machine’s front organization in Cambridgeport reports $50,000 from the state’s Department of Conservation and Recreation, and $25,000 from the City of Cambridge.
Construction is targeted at the area west of the Magazine Beach playing fields rising perhaps 20 feet above the Charles River. The area consists of a lovely little parking area which supports a picnic area and an historical building.
As usual when you are dealing with an arm of the Cambridge Machine, parts of their activities which would be offensive to decent people are not mentioned. The Cambridge Machine just seeks the support of decent people while lying by omission.
There is no mention of their fight to destroy the lovely little parking area which is needed for the picnic area and of major advantage to the historical building. There is also no mention that this outrage has been removed from the package.
Business as usual from a very bad situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Charles River White Geese crossing on ramp to get to food — A rotten reality
1. Introduction.
A. Last post.
B. Well intentioned expression of concern.
C. On line responses.
2. Distressing Point by Point.
3. Brief summation of history.
A. The Charles River White Geese, state bureaucrats,”reprehensible” Cambridge
B. The Cambridge Machine.
C. Boston University.
D. The Charles River “Conservancy.”
E. The BU Bridge Repairs.
F. The soon to be impenetrable thicket.
4. Crossing the on ramp.
5. The Machine’s “Expert.”
1. Introduction.
A. Last post.
In my last post at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-white-geese-commute-to.html, I gave a bit of a photo history with regard to a well intentioned woman’s concern about the Charles River White Geese’s crossing the on ramp to Memorial Drive to get to the luscious grass under Memorial Drive.
B. Well intentioned expression of concern.
The comment of this fine woman to the listserve ran:
************
There are lots of white geese around BU bridge with baby geese.
Because they don't have much grass there yesterday they decided to walk across the busy street to get some from the island between to road lines. I stayed there with my bikes signaling to the cars to wait.
I am afraid if geese continues to cross the street they will eventually get hit by the car. Could someone advise me on who to contact to
(1) plant some grass on where the geese are
(2) add a gate so they don't enter the street
************
C. On line responses.
I responded to her in volumes not well organized. Below is my attempt to better organize.
Additionally, however, when you are dealing with The Machine, people all of a sudden get announced as “experts.” See below.
2. Distressing Point by Point.
Responding to the well intended person.
(1) Plant some grass.
The destructive people at city and state are deliberately starving the Charles River White Geese. They have walled off their grass food at Magazine Beach for most of the past 31 years with a bizarre wall of introduced bushes which seem to have no purpose other than starving the Charles River White Geese.
(2) Add a gate.
One of the outrages achieved by state and local bureaucrats in the past 13 years has been to open up the fence through which the geese just passed to commute to the food under Memorial Drive.
Excellent point coming from a decent human being. We, however, are dealing with Cambridge and state bureaucrats and pols and a rotten Machine keeping both in place through corrupt tactics.
After their food is returned to them, it would be an excellent idea to close the fence as it was before this outrage started.
3. Brief summation of history.
A. The Charles River White Geese, state bureaucrats,”reprehensible” Cambridge
The Charles River White Geese have lived in a mile long habitat centered on the BU Bridge on the Cambridge side of the Charles River for more than 30 years.
During this period, they have been loved by all normal people familiar with them.
The Cambridge Machine and the key bureaucrats anything but normal.
During the last twelve years, bizarre projects (and bizarre application of a responsible project) in the area have done severe harm to them.
Their food for almost all of the past 31 years at Magazine Beach has been blocked to them by a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation which runs about two tenths of a mile with one tiny break and which prevents access to and from the Charles River with regard to the Magazine Beach playing fields.
For all the past twelve years, the key manager has repeatedly proclaimed his intent to do them no harm. He has since defined starving them as not harming them. It also turns out that the agency, the Department of Conservation and Recreation has a policy to kill off all resident animals on the Charles River Basin.
The policy, as with too much reality when talking to such people, is obfuscated to the maximum extent.
They have made their designated use for all of the Charles River Basin as “parkland.” Their secret definition of “parkland” is that no resident animals need apply and that all Urban Wilds will be destroyed.
The DCR, with the assistance of the Cambridge Machine, directly or usually by preventing action, have taken every opportunity possible to inflict as much harm as they can incidental to whatever the latest project is.
Until the Cambridge City Manager declared war on them with his 1996 plans, the Charles River White Geese were loved by the DCR.
They even posted Goose Crossings signs to protect them as they found need to cross the on ramp or, even, Memorial Drive itself.
That all changed when the Cambridge City Manager declared war on them.
The non stop lies of “no intent to harm” show their value and the rottenness of the bureaucrats.
B. The Cambridge Machine.
These people’s strings are pulled by perhaps a tiny minority of people but it is silly to distinguish between the knaves and the fools. They all behave the same and they all are as determined in their efforts.
I really do not want to go into the many rotten things they have done while lying political correctness.
The key tool is preventing action by creating fake groups which claim to be concerned about an issue then preventing action on the important stuff.
C. Boston University.
Boston University, in 1999, entered into an illegal agreement with the DCR under which the Goose Meadow was agreed to be BU’s turf.
In implementing that agreement, BU, on the morning before a Conservation Commission public meeting on the issue, moved heavy equipment into the Goose Meadow.
Before they legally could do anything, all the urban wild was destroyed and grass planted along with a silly ash walk.
They lied that they did not do it until they were condemned by the Cambridge Conservation Commission. Then they bragged.
Nobody used it except for the animals.
It regrew.
D. The Charles River “Conservancy.”
This fake group originally called itself “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
They sponsored the first presentation of the Cambridge City Manager’s plan in 1996.
The DCR claimed loads of complaints against the Charles River White Geese. The usual lie.
Friends of the White Geese made a Freedom on Information Act demand.
One complaint on file, by the fake group AFTER a request for complaint was given to the fake group by the DCR.
In 2003, they entered into a meaningful agreement, apparently, to do environmental destruction for the DCR. From then on, over a period of several years, nearly all ground vegetation was destroyed between the BU Boathouse (a block to the east) and the Goose Meadow.
The destruction was done in steps, starting in the woods next to the BU Boathouse and moving east. All ground vegetation was destroyed except in and near the area intended to be used for BU Bridge work.
None has come back, apparently the result of poisoning.
The aerial photo I posted in the last report shows vegetation throughout the Goose Meadow in 2006.
E. The BU Bridge Repairs.
Access was needed. A 100 foot strip for access made sense.
So naturally, the DCR did much more than was necessary. They destroyed the northern area by the on ramp about 75% of the way across going east.
All the undestroyed ground vegetation was destroyed except for two patches abutting the construction zone.
F. The soon to be impenetrable thicket.
Just planted, as usual totally illegal, no public notice, no communication of intent.
4. Crossing the on ramp.
This was impossible until October 1999 when the first attacks came.
Boston University destroyed the Urban Wild which was their Nesting Area. As part of the destruction, BU illegally created two openings in an iron fence which had been there for 50 (?) years or more, one at the corner, one at the eastern end of the Goose Meadow against the on ramp.
Since the heartless bastards starting starving them, the Charles River White Geese frequently crossed the on ramp to get that lovely grass.
Two factors come into play: The care of the Charles River White Geese. Decent, normal human beings love them.
A. The care of the Charles River White Geese.
They gather at the curb of the sidewalk following the on ramp. They very carefully observe traffic coming up the ramp. When it is safe, they cross.
They have one problem in crossing: they are geese. They do not understand how to cross rapidly and promptly. They meander. It does take quite a while to cross.
B. Normal human beings love them.
The City of Cambridge, the DCR and the fake groups are really rotten exceptions.
Decent, normal people love them.
Drivers happily stand on the ramp waiting for them to cross.
Big smiles of appreciation.
5. The Machine’s “Expert.”
An “expert” associated with the machine has been designated to this well intended woman.
When you see an “expert” associated with the machine, be scared and most definitely do not trust the “expert.”
The designated “expert” presented to this fine woman has recently:
(1). Praised the soon to be impenetrable thicket planted to replace the bulk of the geese’s nests, and
(2). Participated as one of the historians in The Machine’s fake history of Magazine Beach. This was the fake history which did not include the last twelve years. I got shouted down when I tried to communicate the outrages of the last 12 years. The Machine explains the last twelve years of outrages at Magazine Beach and the Destroyed Nesting Area by claiming the last twelve years do not exist. The machine is obviously hiding a lot. The “expert”, as I said, was one of the people presenting The Machine’s fake history.
So a well intended person has been presented with an “expert” on the Charles River White Geese who has a bed record.
Business as usual when you are dealing with the rotten situation in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.
A. Last post.
B. Well intentioned expression of concern.
C. On line responses.
2. Distressing Point by Point.
3. Brief summation of history.
A. The Charles River White Geese, state bureaucrats,”reprehensible” Cambridge
B. The Cambridge Machine.
C. Boston University.
D. The Charles River “Conservancy.”
E. The BU Bridge Repairs.
F. The soon to be impenetrable thicket.
4. Crossing the on ramp.
5. The Machine’s “Expert.”
1. Introduction.
A. Last post.
In my last post at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-white-geese-commute-to.html, I gave a bit of a photo history with regard to a well intentioned woman’s concern about the Charles River White Geese’s crossing the on ramp to Memorial Drive to get to the luscious grass under Memorial Drive.
B. Well intentioned expression of concern.
The comment of this fine woman to the listserve ran:
************
There are lots of white geese around BU bridge with baby geese.
Because they don't have much grass there yesterday they decided to walk across the busy street to get some from the island between to road lines. I stayed there with my bikes signaling to the cars to wait.
I am afraid if geese continues to cross the street they will eventually get hit by the car. Could someone advise me on who to contact to
(1) plant some grass on where the geese are
(2) add a gate so they don't enter the street
************
C. On line responses.
I responded to her in volumes not well organized. Below is my attempt to better organize.
Additionally, however, when you are dealing with The Machine, people all of a sudden get announced as “experts.” See below.
2. Distressing Point by Point.
Responding to the well intended person.
(1) Plant some grass.
The destructive people at city and state are deliberately starving the Charles River White Geese. They have walled off their grass food at Magazine Beach for most of the past 31 years with a bizarre wall of introduced bushes which seem to have no purpose other than starving the Charles River White Geese.
(2) Add a gate.
One of the outrages achieved by state and local bureaucrats in the past 13 years has been to open up the fence through which the geese just passed to commute to the food under Memorial Drive.
Excellent point coming from a decent human being. We, however, are dealing with Cambridge and state bureaucrats and pols and a rotten Machine keeping both in place through corrupt tactics.
After their food is returned to them, it would be an excellent idea to close the fence as it was before this outrage started.
3. Brief summation of history.
A. The Charles River White Geese, state bureaucrats,”reprehensible” Cambridge
The Charles River White Geese have lived in a mile long habitat centered on the BU Bridge on the Cambridge side of the Charles River for more than 30 years.
During this period, they have been loved by all normal people familiar with them.
The Cambridge Machine and the key bureaucrats anything but normal.
During the last twelve years, bizarre projects (and bizarre application of a responsible project) in the area have done severe harm to them.
Their food for almost all of the past 31 years at Magazine Beach has been blocked to them by a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation which runs about two tenths of a mile with one tiny break and which prevents access to and from the Charles River with regard to the Magazine Beach playing fields.
For all the past twelve years, the key manager has repeatedly proclaimed his intent to do them no harm. He has since defined starving them as not harming them. It also turns out that the agency, the Department of Conservation and Recreation has a policy to kill off all resident animals on the Charles River Basin.
The policy, as with too much reality when talking to such people, is obfuscated to the maximum extent.
They have made their designated use for all of the Charles River Basin as “parkland.” Their secret definition of “parkland” is that no resident animals need apply and that all Urban Wilds will be destroyed.
The DCR, with the assistance of the Cambridge Machine, directly or usually by preventing action, have taken every opportunity possible to inflict as much harm as they can incidental to whatever the latest project is.
Until the Cambridge City Manager declared war on them with his 1996 plans, the Charles River White Geese were loved by the DCR.
They even posted Goose Crossings signs to protect them as they found need to cross the on ramp or, even, Memorial Drive itself.
That all changed when the Cambridge City Manager declared war on them.
The non stop lies of “no intent to harm” show their value and the rottenness of the bureaucrats.
B. The Cambridge Machine.
These people’s strings are pulled by perhaps a tiny minority of people but it is silly to distinguish between the knaves and the fools. They all behave the same and they all are as determined in their efforts.
I really do not want to go into the many rotten things they have done while lying political correctness.
The key tool is preventing action by creating fake groups which claim to be concerned about an issue then preventing action on the important stuff.
C. Boston University.
Boston University, in 1999, entered into an illegal agreement with the DCR under which the Goose Meadow was agreed to be BU’s turf.
In implementing that agreement, BU, on the morning before a Conservation Commission public meeting on the issue, moved heavy equipment into the Goose Meadow.
Before they legally could do anything, all the urban wild was destroyed and grass planted along with a silly ash walk.
They lied that they did not do it until they were condemned by the Cambridge Conservation Commission. Then they bragged.
Nobody used it except for the animals.
It regrew.
D. The Charles River “Conservancy.”
This fake group originally called itself “Friends of Magazine Beach.”
They sponsored the first presentation of the Cambridge City Manager’s plan in 1996.
The DCR claimed loads of complaints against the Charles River White Geese. The usual lie.
Friends of the White Geese made a Freedom on Information Act demand.
One complaint on file, by the fake group AFTER a request for complaint was given to the fake group by the DCR.
In 2003, they entered into a meaningful agreement, apparently, to do environmental destruction for the DCR. From then on, over a period of several years, nearly all ground vegetation was destroyed between the BU Boathouse (a block to the east) and the Goose Meadow.
The destruction was done in steps, starting in the woods next to the BU Boathouse and moving east. All ground vegetation was destroyed except in and near the area intended to be used for BU Bridge work.
None has come back, apparently the result of poisoning.
The aerial photo I posted in the last report shows vegetation throughout the Goose Meadow in 2006.
E. The BU Bridge Repairs.
Access was needed. A 100 foot strip for access made sense.
So naturally, the DCR did much more than was necessary. They destroyed the northern area by the on ramp about 75% of the way across going east.
All the undestroyed ground vegetation was destroyed except for two patches abutting the construction zone.
F. The soon to be impenetrable thicket.
Just planted, as usual totally illegal, no public notice, no communication of intent.
4. Crossing the on ramp.
This was impossible until October 1999 when the first attacks came.
Boston University destroyed the Urban Wild which was their Nesting Area. As part of the destruction, BU illegally created two openings in an iron fence which had been there for 50 (?) years or more, one at the corner, one at the eastern end of the Goose Meadow against the on ramp.
Since the heartless bastards starting starving them, the Charles River White Geese frequently crossed the on ramp to get that lovely grass.
Two factors come into play: The care of the Charles River White Geese. Decent, normal human beings love them.
A. The care of the Charles River White Geese.
They gather at the curb of the sidewalk following the on ramp. They very carefully observe traffic coming up the ramp. When it is safe, they cross.
They have one problem in crossing: they are geese. They do not understand how to cross rapidly and promptly. They meander. It does take quite a while to cross.
B. Normal human beings love them.
The City of Cambridge, the DCR and the fake groups are really rotten exceptions.
Decent, normal people love them.
Drivers happily stand on the ramp waiting for them to cross.
Big smiles of appreciation.
5. The Machine’s “Expert.”
An “expert” associated with the machine has been designated to this well intended woman.
When you see an “expert” associated with the machine, be scared and most definitely do not trust the “expert.”
The designated “expert” presented to this fine woman has recently:
(1). Praised the soon to be impenetrable thicket planted to replace the bulk of the geese’s nests, and
(2). Participated as one of the historians in The Machine’s fake history of Magazine Beach. This was the fake history which did not include the last twelve years. I got shouted down when I tried to communicate the outrages of the last 12 years. The Machine explains the last twelve years of outrages at Magazine Beach and the Destroyed Nesting Area by claiming the last twelve years do not exist. The machine is obviously hiding a lot. The “expert”, as I said, was one of the people presenting The Machine’s fake history.
So a well intended person has been presented with an “expert” on the Charles River White Geese who has a bed record.
Business as usual when you are dealing with the rotten situation in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
The Charles River White Geese commute to feed, BU Bridge / Goose Meadow photos for perspective.
1. Introduction.
2. 2012/05-07/08 04-14-12 DNA Entrance from BU Bridge
3. Arial Shots 2006/Goose Meadow
4. 01 MDC/Marked up preliminary plans to destroy nesting area.
1. Introduction.
I have previously reported tentative forays by the Charles River White Geese into that portion of their Nesting Area which has been destroyed for work on the BU Bridge (plus excessive destruction).
I saw them first venture into a near portion of the impenetrable thicket being created there by the DCR, and then up the hillside supporting the on ramp to Memorial Drive, the northern part of the nesting area.
I have gotten reports yesterday of the geese extending further out and crossing the on ramp to feed on the grass under Memorial Drive.
I am trying to place the situation in perspective by this report. I will follow up with a separate report with analysis. here are a few views. The two reports are separated because the other report WILL be long and these photos are taking more than I expected, but they are of value.
2. 2012/05-07/08 04-14-12 DNA Entrance from BU Bridge
This is a photo I took in April from the far side of the BU Bridge. The near asphalt is the BU Bridge. The asphalt on the far left toward the top is the on ramp. The brick structure above that is Memorial Drive. The entrance illegally created by Boston University for the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s predecessor is just beyond the last fence segment to the left. If you look closely, you can see the opening.
Inside the fence is the Destroyed Nesting Area. Visible is the hillside supporting the on ramp. The geese I saw exploring were in the open spot just beyond the big tree.
They usually wander through the opening, turn right and stand at the curb watching traffic. When it seems safe they cross. They are extremely responsible pedestrians waiting for the traffic to clear. When crossing, regrettably, they walk like a bunch of geese. They do not go straight. They meander. I have never seen a drive complain during one of their crossings. They are loved by one and all, as long as one and all are not part of the Cambridge Machine and their friends.
3. Arial Shots 2006/Goose Meadow
This is an arial shot in winter 2006 of the Destroyed Nesting Area.
This is before the BU Bridge work but after the destruction of ground vegetation started between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse. The destruction, very clearly by the Charles River “Conservancy” commenced in 2003 with the appointment of the CRC by the DCR to do its environmental destruction. The destruction of ground vegetation was done in stages, first on the hillside between the Grand Junction and the BU Boathouse, then under the trees in the nesting area nearest the Grand Junction, then against the Charles in the nesting area, then in the middle of the nesting area.
What is so very dramatic about this photo is that, while it is a winter scene, ground vegetation is visible almost everywhere, albeit in winter dormancy. All that vegetation has been destroyed except for limited native bushes abutting the construction zone / soon to be impenetrable thicket.
Looking at the top right of the BU Bridge, you can see the curve shown in the photo. Just to the right of it is a big white area. This is the entrance illegally created by Boston University for the DCR. This is how the Charles River White Geese exit seeking food because they are being starved.
The winding path coming out of the white area is a silly ash path created by Boston University which immediately started washing into the Charles River.
At the bottom of the photo is the Grand Junction railroad bridge. To its right is part of the hillside between the Grand Junction and the BU Boathouse.
The area at the top and slightly to the right is where the Charles River White Geese cross to get the pittance of food under Memorial Drive.
4. 01 MDC/Marked up preliminary plans to destroy nesting area.
In August 1999, I obtained from the head of planning for the Metropolitan District Commission (the DCR’s predecessor) her plans for destruction at the goose meadow and Magazine Beach. She went over the plans in detail with me, showing the tiny differences in her plans from plans announced by the Cambridge City Manager in fall of 1996 in a meeting organized by the predecessor of the Charles River “Conservancy”.
I marked up the plans and used this portion of the marked up plans as a flier.
Note in particular the small vehicle highways. These have been started in the current outrage. Note the lines under the BU Bridge. This is a highway proposal under the BU Bridge to connect the Goose Meadow to the Magazine Beach playing fields.
To the left of the BU Bridge is a pollution control plant of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority which is brilliantly designed to minimize impact.
To the far left is the east extremity of the Magazine Beach playing fields.
If you look carefully, you can see the highway in the Charles. This highway with massive environmental destruction, destruction of trees, and heartless animal abuse is still being worked for, but the CRC has switched to the Boston side because the bureaucrats have condemned their highway as an outrage.
These plans were before the illegal destruction by Boston University. The illegally created opening shows on the plans a little to the left / west of where it was ultimately created. To its right is the ramp that the Charles River White Geese cross to get a pittance of food under Memorial Drive, since they are being starved, denied the grass at Magazine Beach they lived off for most of the last 30 years.
2. 2012/05-07/08 04-14-12 DNA Entrance from BU Bridge
3. Arial Shots 2006/Goose Meadow
4. 01 MDC/Marked up preliminary plans to destroy nesting area.
1. Introduction.
I have previously reported tentative forays by the Charles River White Geese into that portion of their Nesting Area which has been destroyed for work on the BU Bridge (plus excessive destruction).
I saw them first venture into a near portion of the impenetrable thicket being created there by the DCR, and then up the hillside supporting the on ramp to Memorial Drive, the northern part of the nesting area.
I have gotten reports yesterday of the geese extending further out and crossing the on ramp to feed on the grass under Memorial Drive.
I am trying to place the situation in perspective by this report. I will follow up with a separate report with analysis. here are a few views. The two reports are separated because the other report WILL be long and these photos are taking more than I expected, but they are of value.
2. 2012/05-07/08 04-14-12 DNA Entrance from BU Bridge
This is a photo I took in April from the far side of the BU Bridge. The near asphalt is the BU Bridge. The asphalt on the far left toward the top is the on ramp. The brick structure above that is Memorial Drive. The entrance illegally created by Boston University for the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s predecessor is just beyond the last fence segment to the left. If you look closely, you can see the opening.
Inside the fence is the Destroyed Nesting Area. Visible is the hillside supporting the on ramp. The geese I saw exploring were in the open spot just beyond the big tree.
They usually wander through the opening, turn right and stand at the curb watching traffic. When it seems safe they cross. They are extremely responsible pedestrians waiting for the traffic to clear. When crossing, regrettably, they walk like a bunch of geese. They do not go straight. They meander. I have never seen a drive complain during one of their crossings. They are loved by one and all, as long as one and all are not part of the Cambridge Machine and their friends.
3. Arial Shots 2006/Goose Meadow
This is an arial shot in winter 2006 of the Destroyed Nesting Area.
This is before the BU Bridge work but after the destruction of ground vegetation started between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse. The destruction, very clearly by the Charles River “Conservancy” commenced in 2003 with the appointment of the CRC by the DCR to do its environmental destruction. The destruction of ground vegetation was done in stages, first on the hillside between the Grand Junction and the BU Boathouse, then under the trees in the nesting area nearest the Grand Junction, then against the Charles in the nesting area, then in the middle of the nesting area.
What is so very dramatic about this photo is that, while it is a winter scene, ground vegetation is visible almost everywhere, albeit in winter dormancy. All that vegetation has been destroyed except for limited native bushes abutting the construction zone / soon to be impenetrable thicket.
Looking at the top right of the BU Bridge, you can see the curve shown in the photo. Just to the right of it is a big white area. This is the entrance illegally created by Boston University for the DCR. This is how the Charles River White Geese exit seeking food because they are being starved.
The winding path coming out of the white area is a silly ash path created by Boston University which immediately started washing into the Charles River.
At the bottom of the photo is the Grand Junction railroad bridge. To its right is part of the hillside between the Grand Junction and the BU Boathouse.
The area at the top and slightly to the right is where the Charles River White Geese cross to get the pittance of food under Memorial Drive.
4. 01 MDC/Marked up preliminary plans to destroy nesting area.
In August 1999, I obtained from the head of planning for the Metropolitan District Commission (the DCR’s predecessor) her plans for destruction at the goose meadow and Magazine Beach. She went over the plans in detail with me, showing the tiny differences in her plans from plans announced by the Cambridge City Manager in fall of 1996 in a meeting organized by the predecessor of the Charles River “Conservancy”.
I marked up the plans and used this portion of the marked up plans as a flier.
Note in particular the small vehicle highways. These have been started in the current outrage. Note the lines under the BU Bridge. This is a highway proposal under the BU Bridge to connect the Goose Meadow to the Magazine Beach playing fields.
To the left of the BU Bridge is a pollution control plant of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority which is brilliantly designed to minimize impact.
To the far left is the east extremity of the Magazine Beach playing fields.
If you look carefully, you can see the highway in the Charles. This highway with massive environmental destruction, destruction of trees, and heartless animal abuse is still being worked for, but the CRC has switched to the Boston side because the bureaucrats have condemned their highway as an outrage.
These plans were before the illegal destruction by Boston University. The illegally created opening shows on the plans a little to the left / west of where it was ultimately created. To its right is the ramp that the Charles River White Geese cross to get a pittance of food under Memorial Drive, since they are being starved, denied the grass at Magazine Beach they lived off for most of the last 30 years.
Monday, June 25, 2012
The reality behind the environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse on the Charles River
First and foremost, destruction is going on on the Charles River because the key entities, the Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge, MA, are simply unfit to have anything to do with management of the environment. The key people well deserve to be fired for their incompetence.
Tactics used by the DCR rely more on flat out lies than do the tactics of the City of Cambridge. Cambridge relies more on skillful lies, but Cambridge has been known to use flat out lies and the DCR uses all sorts of lies, skillful included.
A very major part of the corrupt situation in Cambridge is organizations connected to the City running around using fraudulent tactics to keep the population under control, achieve whatever destruction they can fool people into helping them with, and lying that the city government is politically correct.
The DCR’s policy toward resident animals is to kill them off unless the move “voluntarily.” This is stated in their secret definition of Parklands - no resident animals need apply. They want parklands everywhere on the Charles River Basin. Tiny urban wilds WILL be destroyed.
And I have proven all of this repeatedly.
That caveat having been made the below aerial photo says a lot about what is going on. My notes indicate that it is from 2006. I assume it is from an environmental impact statement, probably on the Urban Ring subway line converted into buses. I assume I added the labels.
In the below middle of the photo are Magazine Beach and the Goose Meadow. Between them is the BU Bridge with the Grand Junction Rail Bridge running under the BU Bridge. The Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) passes under the BU Bridge and Commonwealth Avenue at the bottom of the photo. The area to the left marked “Cambridge-Allston tolls very visibly also includes the Boynton Railroad Yard. On the upper right is the Grand Junction Railroad Track. Memorial Drive is for the most part, the southern extreme of Cambridge, which is on the top.
A few yard trains a day run between the Boynton Yards and other yards associated with North Station in Boston. The trains run over the rail bridge and up the Grand Junction.
Harvard purchased the Cambridge-Allston tolls / Boynton Yards not long after a state bus study demonstrated that it was possible to run an off ramp from that area of the Mass. Pike near the yards over the rail bridge and to Cambridge. Harvard’s maneuvers since then make it clear that Harvard intends to move the Harvard Medical School to this location.
The River Street Bridge at the top left becomes Cambridge Street in Boston. Much more now empty lands are owned by Harvard above Cambridge Street. The empire expansion by Harvard in this area was stopped in 2009 because of the Great Recession. Harvard has announced resumption of construction in 2014.
Careful observation of Memorial Drive to the right of the Goose Meadow shows a point where Memorial Drive widens into the Charles River. This point is about 40% of the way over. This is the location of the excellent 104 tree grove which the fake groups fraudulently flaunt, bragging about their excellence and lying through omission by not mentioning that they intend to decimate it.
The area targeted for massive tree destruction starts at Magazine Beach extends up Memorial Drive, passes the Massachusetts Avenue Bridge (marked, upper right) and extends to the Longfellow Bridge, the next bridge after the Mass. Ave. Bridge. These are the trees that the DCR lied were universally diseased when they tried to get Obama money for the purpose, but which they accurately described in their filing with Cambridge as exactly the opposite.
A major reason for destruction on Memorial Drive, and never mentioned, is the relocation of the off ramp to the Massachusetts Turnpike so that Harvard can build on it. The destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive very clearly serves that purpose.
Magazine Beach is to the left of the BU Bridge. It has seen two phases of attacks, with a third ongoing.
In the first phase, the DCR and Cambridge walled off the Charles River from Magazine Beach in direct violation of the DCR’s supposed policies which were then changed after the fact. The only portion of Magazine Beach which was not walled off was a tiny boat dock. The boat dock was kept but made useless by the creation of a bridge to get to it. Another of the DCR’s supposed policies is that they want nothing but water related uses on the Charles River.
The Charles River White Geese had the nerve to continue limited feeding at Magazine Beach after their principal food was walled off to them. They entered through the boat dock.
So the DCR and Cambridge, in Phase II created an massive wall to keep the Charles River White Geese from entering through the vestigial boat dock.
Phase III involves the replacement of the prime nesting area of the Charles River White Geese with more impenetrable thicket vegetation and involves the destruction of the lovely little parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street. On the Map can be seen a white stretch of building, the Morse School, just above Magazine Beach. To the left of the school is Magazine Street. The parking lot being destroyed is just under Magazine Street.
The best guess as to the future intended purpose of the goose meadow is as toll booths on the relocated Mass. Pike off ramps to open up Boynton Yards / the existing Mass. Pike off ramps for the relocated Harvard Medical School.
In the middle future, the Goose Meadow has shown on city maps as the BU Triangle. Part of the small vehicle highway the CRC and other fake groups are fighting for would be built under the BU Bridge connecting the Goose Meadow to Magazine Beach probably through that opening which was left for the now destroyed boat dock.
BU has used Magazine Beach for graduation ceremonies.
Harvard shows the Cambridge Common as part of Harvard’s open space. These machinations make this portion of the Charles River part of the BU Campus. BU owns the boathouse a block to the right of the Goose Meadow.
Similarly, the destruction of hundreds of trees from Magazine Beach to the Longfellow Bridge turns that area into part of the MIT Campus. One of the first outrages was the destruction of parking on the river side of Memorial Drive, denying access to the public to that extent and making that portion of Memorial Drive just that much more part of the MIT Campus which abuts Memorial Drive to its north throughout the destruction zone.
Tactics used by the DCR rely more on flat out lies than do the tactics of the City of Cambridge. Cambridge relies more on skillful lies, but Cambridge has been known to use flat out lies and the DCR uses all sorts of lies, skillful included.
A very major part of the corrupt situation in Cambridge is organizations connected to the City running around using fraudulent tactics to keep the population under control, achieve whatever destruction they can fool people into helping them with, and lying that the city government is politically correct.
The DCR’s policy toward resident animals is to kill them off unless the move “voluntarily.” This is stated in their secret definition of Parklands - no resident animals need apply. They want parklands everywhere on the Charles River Basin. Tiny urban wilds WILL be destroyed.
And I have proven all of this repeatedly.
That caveat having been made the below aerial photo says a lot about what is going on. My notes indicate that it is from 2006. I assume it is from an environmental impact statement, probably on the Urban Ring subway line converted into buses. I assume I added the labels.
In the below middle of the photo are Magazine Beach and the Goose Meadow. Between them is the BU Bridge with the Grand Junction Rail Bridge running under the BU Bridge. The Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) passes under the BU Bridge and Commonwealth Avenue at the bottom of the photo. The area to the left marked “Cambridge-Allston tolls very visibly also includes the Boynton Railroad Yard. On the upper right is the Grand Junction Railroad Track. Memorial Drive is for the most part, the southern extreme of Cambridge, which is on the top.
A few yard trains a day run between the Boynton Yards and other yards associated with North Station in Boston. The trains run over the rail bridge and up the Grand Junction.
Harvard purchased the Cambridge-Allston tolls / Boynton Yards not long after a state bus study demonstrated that it was possible to run an off ramp from that area of the Mass. Pike near the yards over the rail bridge and to Cambridge. Harvard’s maneuvers since then make it clear that Harvard intends to move the Harvard Medical School to this location.
The River Street Bridge at the top left becomes Cambridge Street in Boston. Much more now empty lands are owned by Harvard above Cambridge Street. The empire expansion by Harvard in this area was stopped in 2009 because of the Great Recession. Harvard has announced resumption of construction in 2014.
Careful observation of Memorial Drive to the right of the Goose Meadow shows a point where Memorial Drive widens into the Charles River. This point is about 40% of the way over. This is the location of the excellent 104 tree grove which the fake groups fraudulently flaunt, bragging about their excellence and lying through omission by not mentioning that they intend to decimate it.
The area targeted for massive tree destruction starts at Magazine Beach extends up Memorial Drive, passes the Massachusetts Avenue Bridge (marked, upper right) and extends to the Longfellow Bridge, the next bridge after the Mass. Ave. Bridge. These are the trees that the DCR lied were universally diseased when they tried to get Obama money for the purpose, but which they accurately described in their filing with Cambridge as exactly the opposite.
A major reason for destruction on Memorial Drive, and never mentioned, is the relocation of the off ramp to the Massachusetts Turnpike so that Harvard can build on it. The destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive very clearly serves that purpose.
Magazine Beach is to the left of the BU Bridge. It has seen two phases of attacks, with a third ongoing.
In the first phase, the DCR and Cambridge walled off the Charles River from Magazine Beach in direct violation of the DCR’s supposed policies which were then changed after the fact. The only portion of Magazine Beach which was not walled off was a tiny boat dock. The boat dock was kept but made useless by the creation of a bridge to get to it. Another of the DCR’s supposed policies is that they want nothing but water related uses on the Charles River.
The Charles River White Geese had the nerve to continue limited feeding at Magazine Beach after their principal food was walled off to them. They entered through the boat dock.
So the DCR and Cambridge, in Phase II created an massive wall to keep the Charles River White Geese from entering through the vestigial boat dock.
Phase III involves the replacement of the prime nesting area of the Charles River White Geese with more impenetrable thicket vegetation and involves the destruction of the lovely little parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street. On the Map can be seen a white stretch of building, the Morse School, just above Magazine Beach. To the left of the school is Magazine Street. The parking lot being destroyed is just under Magazine Street.
The best guess as to the future intended purpose of the goose meadow is as toll booths on the relocated Mass. Pike off ramps to open up Boynton Yards / the existing Mass. Pike off ramps for the relocated Harvard Medical School.
In the middle future, the Goose Meadow has shown on city maps as the BU Triangle. Part of the small vehicle highway the CRC and other fake groups are fighting for would be built under the BU Bridge connecting the Goose Meadow to Magazine Beach probably through that opening which was left for the now destroyed boat dock.
BU has used Magazine Beach for graduation ceremonies.
Harvard shows the Cambridge Common as part of Harvard’s open space. These machinations make this portion of the Charles River part of the BU Campus. BU owns the boathouse a block to the right of the Goose Meadow.
Similarly, the destruction of hundreds of trees from Magazine Beach to the Longfellow Bridge turns that area into part of the MIT Campus. One of the first outrages was the destruction of parking on the river side of Memorial Drive, denying access to the public to that extent and making that portion of Memorial Drive just that much more part of the MIT Campus which abuts Memorial Drive to its north throughout the destruction zone.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Charles River “Conservancy”’s map of its proposed destruction
Following up on the CRC report below from 6/22/12, the Anderson (Harvard Square), Western Avenue and River Street Bridges are the next three highway bridges to the west of the BU Bridge which, in turn, is the core of the habitat of the Charles River White Geese, at least was the core of their habitat until these destructive people started heartlessly abusing them.
This is the CRC’s map pushing their apparent attempt to go around the responsible bureaucrats who condemned their construction in the Charles River and on its banks as environmentally irresponsible.
Our prior post reports on the CRC bragging that it is using state representatives to get around the condemnation of the Department of Transportation as part of a joint report with the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Naturally, as usual, the reality, the circumventing of the responsible evaluation of their plans, is omitted from the CRC bragging. Posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-conservancy-reports-1.html.
This is the CRC’s map pushing their apparent attempt to go around the responsible bureaucrats who condemned their construction in the Charles River and on its banks as environmentally irresponsible.
Our prior post reports on the CRC bragging that it is using state representatives to get around the condemnation of the Department of Transportation as part of a joint report with the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Naturally, as usual, the reality, the circumventing of the responsible evaluation of their plans, is omitted from the CRC bragging. Posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-conservancy-reports-1.html.
Friday, June 22, 2012
Charles River “Conservancy” Reports (1) Algae growth on the Lower Charles and (2) State Representatives working for environmental destruction
1. Algae Infestation.
2. State Representatives assist CRC’s fight for environmental destruction.
A couple of interesting points in this month’s report from the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy”.
1. Algae Infestation.
The CRC has noticed a blue-green algae bloom in the Lower Charles River basin.
I have not bothered to check their website to see what they claim might be its cause.
Reality reflects the high likelihood that this algae is the same algae which has reoccurred annually since the Department of Conservation and Recreation dumped Tartan on Ebersol Fields near the Massachusetts General Hospital.
The poor dears were distressed that their regular poisons were not doing the job and dumped Tartan on the fields to “remedy” the situation. Tartan is marked not for use near water. The next day the algae had poisoned the Charles River from the Mass. Ave. Bridge to the harbor, and was certain to return annually.
The poor dears.
In the CRC's world the destructive Department of Conservation and Recreation does no wrong.
Reality is irrelevant.
In the CRC's world the destructive Department of Conservation and Recreation does no wrong.
And the CRC will keep on telling you that while praising DCR destructiveness.
2. State Representatives assist CRC’s fight for environmental destruction.
The CRC reports: Earlier this week “State Reps Moran, Wolf, and Hecht filed an amendment to the transportation bond bill asking for funding to build” environmentally destructive "underpasses" on the Boston side. These would correspond to the "underpasses" which were condemned by responsible state bureaucrats on the Cambridge side as environmentally destructive. Same bridges, opposite end.
These would be constructed under the Anderson (Harvard Square), Western Avenue and River Street bridges.
I have reported on this outrage many times.
I know nothing about Moran and Hecht.
State Representative Alice Wolf is as environmentally destructive as is the rest of the Cambridge Machine, while claiming, falsely of course, environmental sainthood.
2. State Representatives assist CRC’s fight for environmental destruction.
A couple of interesting points in this month’s report from the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy”.
1. Algae Infestation.
The CRC has noticed a blue-green algae bloom in the Lower Charles River basin.
I have not bothered to check their website to see what they claim might be its cause.
Reality reflects the high likelihood that this algae is the same algae which has reoccurred annually since the Department of Conservation and Recreation dumped Tartan on Ebersol Fields near the Massachusetts General Hospital.
The poor dears were distressed that their regular poisons were not doing the job and dumped Tartan on the fields to “remedy” the situation. Tartan is marked not for use near water. The next day the algae had poisoned the Charles River from the Mass. Ave. Bridge to the harbor, and was certain to return annually.
The poor dears.
In the CRC's world the destructive Department of Conservation and Recreation does no wrong.
Reality is irrelevant.
In the CRC's world the destructive Department of Conservation and Recreation does no wrong.
And the CRC will keep on telling you that while praising DCR destructiveness.
2. State Representatives assist CRC’s fight for environmental destruction.
The CRC reports: Earlier this week “State Reps Moran, Wolf, and Hecht filed an amendment to the transportation bond bill asking for funding to build” environmentally destructive "underpasses" on the Boston side. These would correspond to the "underpasses" which were condemned by responsible state bureaucrats on the Cambridge side as environmentally destructive. Same bridges, opposite end.
These would be constructed under the Anderson (Harvard Square), Western Avenue and River Street bridges.
I have reported on this outrage many times.
I know nothing about Moran and Hecht.
State Representative Alice Wolf is as environmentally destructive as is the rest of the Cambridge Machine, while claiming, falsely of course, environmental sainthood.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Cambridge, MA, USA City Councilors position themselves on Monteiro Civil Rights Decision
1. Analysis.
2. Current Maneuvers.
1. Analysis.
We have previously reported on necessary maneuvers by the Cambridge City Council to get the payments in the case of Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge into the appropriate budget categories.
This arrangement of moneys has resulted in maneuvers by the Cambridge City Council.
The only important issue is their position on the real Court decisions.
The Cambridge City Manager has been determined guilty to the Appeals Court level of destroying the life of former Department Head Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The Appeals Court refused to dignify with a formal opinion Cambridge’s appeal from the Superior Court decision.
They commented: “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.”
The Superior Court trial judge wrote an excellent, long opinion which can be summed up in one word: “reprehensible.” And she proved her use of that word in great detail.
The Trial Jury awarded $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The check paid to Monteiro ultimately ran to $8.3 million.
The Courts gave the Cambridge City Council a series of decisions which placed the Cambridge City Council in position to fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office with no fear of the firing resulting in some sort of major Court award for improper firing. The decisions justified firing him without his golden parachute and, possibly, without pension.
So Cambridge, MA, being Cambridge, MA, the Cambridge City Council and its friends are doing all sorts of lovely maneuvering about the issue with exactly no votes on firing the Cambridge City Manager and no proposals to fire the Cambridge City Manager.
2. Current Maneuvers.
That being said, Cambridge Day has reported in a report dated today, June 21, 2012, on the discussions of the necessary financial manipulations and the positioning associated therewith at last Monday, June 18, 2012's, meeting of the Cambridge City Council.
I do not deign to honor the city councilors’ manipulations reporting the details.
The Cambridge Day report on Monday’s meeting may be read at:
http://www.cambridgeday.com/2012/06/19/city-faces-six-lawsuits-similar-to-those-that-cost-14-6-million-law-department-says/.
One important part of this report is that there are some six more cases pending similar to the base issues in Monteiro.
Cambridge Day says that the five consolidated and then separated cases of which Monteiro was one and which are now completed ran $14.6 million. They included in their report a PDF of a letter from the Cambridge City Solicitor going into details. The letter is dated June 12, 2012.
The Finance Committee report on the June 11, 2012 meeting may be read at: http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/CommitteeReport.cfm?instance_id=667. The attachments are not available from that posting.
I have previously given an advance report on the June 11, 2012, Finance Committee agenda from a Kelley Supporter: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/cambridge-ma-usa-city-council-to.html. My report seems to be the only place where the frequently mentioned Kelly motion is available. The city solicitor’s answers to Kelley’s questions have been provided by Cambridge Day as part of its report on the City Council meeting of last Monday night.
The Cambridge Day report on the Finance Committee Meeting may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/monteiro-v-city-of-cambridge-some.html.
At the Monday meeting the city council received the report and did the financial maneuvers. The report did not include the Kelly proposed order, and it does not appear to have been separately made by Kelley Monday night.
Four city councilors submitted a nice sounding motion on the Monteiro cases. That motion may be read at: http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?item_id=35644. The motion was referred to a city committee outside the city council with the other five members outvoting the sponsors.
In no way did this watered down motion include any discussion of firing the Cambridge City Manager.
2. Current Maneuvers.
1. Analysis.
We have previously reported on necessary maneuvers by the Cambridge City Council to get the payments in the case of Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge into the appropriate budget categories.
This arrangement of moneys has resulted in maneuvers by the Cambridge City Council.
The only important issue is their position on the real Court decisions.
The Cambridge City Manager has been determined guilty to the Appeals Court level of destroying the life of former Department Head Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The Appeals Court refused to dignify with a formal opinion Cambridge’s appeal from the Superior Court decision.
They commented: “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.”
The Superior Court trial judge wrote an excellent, long opinion which can be summed up in one word: “reprehensible.” And she proved her use of that word in great detail.
The Trial Jury awarded $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million penal damages. The check paid to Monteiro ultimately ran to $8.3 million.
The Courts gave the Cambridge City Council a series of decisions which placed the Cambridge City Council in position to fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office with no fear of the firing resulting in some sort of major Court award for improper firing. The decisions justified firing him without his golden parachute and, possibly, without pension.
So Cambridge, MA, being Cambridge, MA, the Cambridge City Council and its friends are doing all sorts of lovely maneuvering about the issue with exactly no votes on firing the Cambridge City Manager and no proposals to fire the Cambridge City Manager.
2. Current Maneuvers.
That being said, Cambridge Day has reported in a report dated today, June 21, 2012, on the discussions of the necessary financial manipulations and the positioning associated therewith at last Monday, June 18, 2012's, meeting of the Cambridge City Council.
I do not deign to honor the city councilors’ manipulations reporting the details.
The Cambridge Day report on Monday’s meeting may be read at:
http://www.cambridgeday.com/2012/06/19/city-faces-six-lawsuits-similar-to-those-that-cost-14-6-million-law-department-says/.
One important part of this report is that there are some six more cases pending similar to the base issues in Monteiro.
Cambridge Day says that the five consolidated and then separated cases of which Monteiro was one and which are now completed ran $14.6 million. They included in their report a PDF of a letter from the Cambridge City Solicitor going into details. The letter is dated June 12, 2012.
The Finance Committee report on the June 11, 2012 meeting may be read at: http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/CommitteeReport.cfm?instance_id=667. The attachments are not available from that posting.
I have previously given an advance report on the June 11, 2012, Finance Committee agenda from a Kelley Supporter: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/cambridge-ma-usa-city-council-to.html. My report seems to be the only place where the frequently mentioned Kelly motion is available. The city solicitor’s answers to Kelley’s questions have been provided by Cambridge Day as part of its report on the City Council meeting of last Monday night.
The Cambridge Day report on the Finance Committee Meeting may be read at: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/monteiro-v-city-of-cambridge-some.html.
At the Monday meeting the city council received the report and did the financial maneuvers. The report did not include the Kelly proposed order, and it does not appear to have been separately made by Kelley Monday night.
Four city councilors submitted a nice sounding motion on the Monteiro cases. That motion may be read at: http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?item_id=35644. The motion was referred to a city committee outside the city council with the other five members outvoting the sponsors.
In no way did this watered down motion include any discussion of firing the Cambridge City Manager.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Harvard University on Harvard’s Resumption of Empire Building in the Allston neighborhood of Boston.
1. Past Report.
2. Harvard on Harvard.
1. Past Report.
On June 18, 2012, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/harvard-to-resume-empire-building-on.html, I reported on boston.com’s report on Harvard University’s planned resumption of its massive expansion in the Allston neighborhood of Boston.
To put this expansion in perspective, ONE PART of the expansion, the future Harvard Medical School site, is bigger than Boston’s Back Bay neighborhood.
Harvard’s empire building is the key to the ongoing environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse on the Charles River.
I went into greater detail in the previous article.
2. Harvard on Harvard.
Trying to figure out what is going on in greater detail, I hunted through Harvard’s website and found what looks at first view like a very massive amount of materials at http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/harvard-announces-plans-next-steps-for-health-and-life-science-center-in-allston/.
The link directly provides an aerial photo of the area being used by this particular project. I think I see Harvard Business School at the top / back of the photo. The date on this page is June 15, 2012.
The site is deceptive in its apparent lack of information.
But, you follow through the links and the materials could be quite massive.
I would love to get input on people’s analysis of these documents, at boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Harvard on Harvard.
1. Past Report.
On June 18, 2012, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/harvard-to-resume-empire-building-on.html, I reported on boston.com’s report on Harvard University’s planned resumption of its massive expansion in the Allston neighborhood of Boston.
To put this expansion in perspective, ONE PART of the expansion, the future Harvard Medical School site, is bigger than Boston’s Back Bay neighborhood.
Harvard’s empire building is the key to the ongoing environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse on the Charles River.
I went into greater detail in the previous article.
2. Harvard on Harvard.
Trying to figure out what is going on in greater detail, I hunted through Harvard’s website and found what looks at first view like a very massive amount of materials at http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/harvard-announces-plans-next-steps-for-health-and-life-science-center-in-allston/.
The link directly provides an aerial photo of the area being used by this particular project. I think I see Harvard Business School at the top / back of the photo. The date on this page is June 15, 2012.
The site is deceptive in its apparent lack of information.
But, you follow through the links and the materials could be quite massive.
I would love to get input on people’s analysis of these documents, at boblat@yahoo.com.
Monday, June 18, 2012
Cambridge City Council and other Monteiro items from the view of a City Manager opponent.
1. Analysis of Cambridge City Council before the fact for Monday, June 18, 2012.
2. The reality in Cambridge, MA.
1. Analysis of Cambridge City Council before the fact for Monday, June 18, 2012.
The following analysis of the Cambridge City Council agenda for Monday, June 18, 2012, is from the same Kelley supporter I quoted not that long ago.
*************
On the agenda are the city manager's after-the-fact requested appropriation of some $12M in surplus city funds to help pay for the $14M+ fiasco and a proposed order calling for a mild reprimand of the chief executive and a formal council apology for his behavior, plus a report on how to avoid similar problems in the future.
Some links:
Audio recording of Monday's Finance Committee meeting
Finance Committee's sloppy report on Monday's meeting (click on the agenda description for CR #4 to view the item and a link to City Manager Bob Healy's $12M funding request)
City clerk's sanitized agenda description of the proposed council order (click on the Policy Order #1 summary to view the actual item, which calls for a council reprimand of Healy and formal apology for his behavior)
Wicked Local / Cambridge Chronicle's wildly inaccurate account (June 15 "updated" version)
Cambridge Day's report (some errors)
[ed: very fancy linking. I hope and think I got it right.]
2. The reality in Cambridge, MA.
The reality is that Cambridge, MA, USA, has a belligerently corrupt city government and the writer is part of the corrupt situation.
The Cambridge City Manager leads the fake groups, which includes the writer, in lies of omission. The very existence of the fake groups is corruption.
The Cambridge City Manager for his belligerent lies of omission and his fake groups deserves to be fired, but the writer is an active part of the problem.
The outrage in the Monteiro case overwhelms the corruption which is the policy of lies of omission which extends to the fake groups.
Monteiro is a situation where
a. the Appeals Court has said the Cambridge City Manager is guilty of malfeasance in office, “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior”
b. following on the Superior Court Judge, “reprehensible: behavior; and
c. jury, $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.
The fact that even supposedly belligerent opponents of the Cambridge City Manager will not listen to the Courts’ clear calls for firing the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance says everything about the corrupt situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.
Only when the pious, indignant types admit they are part of the problem will Cambridge, MA, USA, stand a chance of cleaning up corrupt practices.
2. The reality in Cambridge, MA.
1. Analysis of Cambridge City Council before the fact for Monday, June 18, 2012.
The following analysis of the Cambridge City Council agenda for Monday, June 18, 2012, is from the same Kelley supporter I quoted not that long ago.
*************
On the agenda are the city manager's after-the-fact requested appropriation of some $12M in surplus city funds to help pay for the $14M+ fiasco and a proposed order calling for a mild reprimand of the chief executive and a formal council apology for his behavior, plus a report on how to avoid similar problems in the future.
Some links:
Audio recording of Monday's Finance Committee meeting
Finance Committee's sloppy report on Monday's meeting (click on the agenda description for CR #4 to view the item and a link to City Manager Bob Healy's $12M funding request)
City clerk's sanitized agenda description of the proposed council order (click on the Policy Order #1 summary to view the actual item, which calls for a council reprimand of Healy and formal apology for his behavior)
Wicked Local / Cambridge Chronicle's wildly inaccurate account (June 15 "updated" version)
Cambridge Day's report (some errors)
[ed: very fancy linking. I hope and think I got it right.]
2. The reality in Cambridge, MA.
The reality is that Cambridge, MA, USA, has a belligerently corrupt city government and the writer is part of the corrupt situation.
The Cambridge City Manager leads the fake groups, which includes the writer, in lies of omission. The very existence of the fake groups is corruption.
The Cambridge City Manager for his belligerent lies of omission and his fake groups deserves to be fired, but the writer is an active part of the problem.
The outrage in the Monteiro case overwhelms the corruption which is the policy of lies of omission which extends to the fake groups.
Monteiro is a situation where
a. the Appeals Court has said the Cambridge City Manager is guilty of malfeasance in office, “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior”
b. following on the Superior Court Judge, “reprehensible: behavior; and
c. jury, $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.
The fact that even supposedly belligerent opponents of the Cambridge City Manager will not listen to the Courts’ clear calls for firing the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance says everything about the corrupt situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.
Only when the pious, indignant types admit they are part of the problem will Cambridge, MA, USA, stand a chance of cleaning up corrupt practices.
Harvard to resume empire building on Western Avenue in Allston
Boston.com reports that Harvard University intends to resume work on its planned science campus on the south side of Western Avenue in the Allston section of Boston, between North Harvard Street and Soldiers Field Road. North Harvard Street becomes the Anderson Bridge.
According to boston.com, construction on the science campus stopped in 2009 because of the Great Recession. Construction is to resume in 2014 on a state of the art health and life sciences laboratory containing between 500,000 and 600,000 square feet.
The report includes a good areal photo of construction to date, which resembles a wasteland from the area and from the ground.
Details of the boston.com report may be read at: http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/allston_brighton/2012/06/harvard_plans_to_resume_work_o.html.
A map of the area was included with our latest Charles River “Conservancy” report at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/more-destruction-on-charles-charles.html.
This Harvard campus in Allston is of major importance to the environment of the Charles River and its animals because the environmental destruction very clearly complements the proposal. In particular Harvard is moving its Medical School to the railroad yards and Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) complex which is north of Cambridge Street, Allston (River Street in Cambridge).
To make this property usable to it, Harvard and its friends are working to move the Massachusetts Turnpike exit serving Allston and Cambridge to the Grand Junction railroad bridge which runs through the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
According to boston.com, construction on the science campus stopped in 2009 because of the Great Recession. Construction is to resume in 2014 on a state of the art health and life sciences laboratory containing between 500,000 and 600,000 square feet.
The report includes a good areal photo of construction to date, which resembles a wasteland from the area and from the ground.
Details of the boston.com report may be read at: http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/allston_brighton/2012/06/harvard_plans_to_resume_work_o.html.
A map of the area was included with our latest Charles River “Conservancy” report at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/more-destruction-on-charles-charles.html.
This Harvard campus in Allston is of major importance to the environment of the Charles River and its animals because the environmental destruction very clearly complements the proposal. In particular Harvard is moving its Medical School to the railroad yards and Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) complex which is north of Cambridge Street, Allston (River Street in Cambridge).
To make this property usable to it, Harvard and its friends are working to move the Massachusetts Turnpike exit serving Allston and Cambridge to the Grand Junction railroad bridge which runs through the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
More destruction on the Charles? The Charles River “Conservancy” gets money to plan.
1. Some evaluations of a strikingly bad organization.
2. More “underpasses” proposed again, this time on the Boston side.
3. Caveat.
1. Some evaluations of a strikingly bad organization.
When we last visited the Charles River “Conservancy” on June 2, 2012, the poor dears were looking for money.
I provided five pages on their real record, the environment destruction and heartless animal abuse.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-conservancy-solicits.html.
On May 2, the poor dears had had printed a letter in the Cambridge Chronicle crying that they were being unfairly mistreated. My response printed by the Cambridge Chronicle pointed out how they were lying about which side they are on and the treatment was highly fair, if you are pro environment.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/response-to-charles-river-conservancy.html.
Well, they are looking for more money.
A joint committee of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation condemned the CRC’s proposal for a new highway on and in the Cambridge side of the Charles River. They condemned the proposal as environmentally destructive.
The euphemism was “underpasses”. My response went into the massive tree destruction, general environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse involved. After a strikingly long list (in 400 words) I decided that “Conservancy” in their name is a lie.
2. More “underpasses” proposed again, this time on the Boston side.
Well, they are fighting for “underpasses” again, same three bridges, just the Boston side.
Let’s see, the bureaucrats responsibly condemned their proposal on the north end of these bridges. So they are fighting for environmental destruction on the south end of the same bridges?
The following is an unauthorized copy of their map, reproduced under the doctrine of fair use.
The Anderson (Harvard Square), Western Avenue and River Street Bridges are the subjects of this attack. The lower / southern side of the river is Boston, the other side Cambridge. Their “underpasses" proposed for the north side have been condemned. The south side is under attack this week.
The next bridge to the right / East, the BU Bridge, is the core of their most successful environmental destruction / heartless animal abuse to date, thanks to the “reprehensible” (quoting that civil rights judge) City of Cambridge with fake group support.
The CRC is getting money from the “Barr Foundation” for making plans on condition that others match the funds. The CRC is seeking the matching money to plan this environmental destruction.
3. Caveat.
My above links go into more detail about the destructiveness of this falsely named group. A couple of points here might help clarify my above comments.
My comment above concerning the BU Bridge is an understatement. Twice a year, on behalf of the DCR, the CRC destroys all bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin except for the massive introduced wall of vegetation at Magazine Beach. Because of the starvation of the Charles River White Geese by that massive wall, letting it grow is much more environmentally destructive than chopping it down.
Additionally, last I heard, the CRC was annually poisoning the eggs of as much migratory waterfowl as they can get away with.
2. More “underpasses” proposed again, this time on the Boston side.
3. Caveat.
1. Some evaluations of a strikingly bad organization.
When we last visited the Charles River “Conservancy” on June 2, 2012, the poor dears were looking for money.
I provided five pages on their real record, the environment destruction and heartless animal abuse.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/charles-river-conservancy-solicits.html.
On May 2, the poor dears had had printed a letter in the Cambridge Chronicle crying that they were being unfairly mistreated. My response printed by the Cambridge Chronicle pointed out how they were lying about which side they are on and the treatment was highly fair, if you are pro environment.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/response-to-charles-river-conservancy.html.
Well, they are looking for more money.
A joint committee of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation condemned the CRC’s proposal for a new highway on and in the Cambridge side of the Charles River. They condemned the proposal as environmentally destructive.
The euphemism was “underpasses”. My response went into the massive tree destruction, general environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse involved. After a strikingly long list (in 400 words) I decided that “Conservancy” in their name is a lie.
2. More “underpasses” proposed again, this time on the Boston side.
Well, they are fighting for “underpasses” again, same three bridges, just the Boston side.
Let’s see, the bureaucrats responsibly condemned their proposal on the north end of these bridges. So they are fighting for environmental destruction on the south end of the same bridges?
The following is an unauthorized copy of their map, reproduced under the doctrine of fair use.
The Anderson (Harvard Square), Western Avenue and River Street Bridges are the subjects of this attack. The lower / southern side of the river is Boston, the other side Cambridge. Their “underpasses" proposed for the north side have been condemned. The south side is under attack this week.
The next bridge to the right / East, the BU Bridge, is the core of their most successful environmental destruction / heartless animal abuse to date, thanks to the “reprehensible” (quoting that civil rights judge) City of Cambridge with fake group support.
The CRC is getting money from the “Barr Foundation” for making plans on condition that others match the funds. The CRC is seeking the matching money to plan this environmental destruction.
3. Caveat.
My above links go into more detail about the destructiveness of this falsely named group. A couple of points here might help clarify my above comments.
My comment above concerning the BU Bridge is an understatement. Twice a year, on behalf of the DCR, the CRC destroys all bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin except for the massive introduced wall of vegetation at Magazine Beach. Because of the starvation of the Charles River White Geese by that massive wall, letting it grow is much more environmentally destructive than chopping it down.
Additionally, last I heard, the CRC was annually poisoning the eggs of as much migratory waterfowl as they can get away with.
Friday, June 15, 2012
Report from the Destroyed Nesting Area: The Charles River White Geese travel a bit further
Last yesterday afternoon, June 14, 2012, the Charles River White Geese strayed into the introduced vegetation zone.
As with last time, the three adolescent goslings were in the lead. They look quite a bit larger now. They were followed by the parents and baby sitter, plus about the same number of members of the gaggle as last time. The identifiable goslings were still yellow. There were some limited other members of the group which may have fuzzy and white and a bit larger. These, if my identification is accurate, would be slightly older goslings.
Once again, the Charles River White Geese did not venture far into the introduced vegetation, just further than the last time I saw them there. Last time, they were in the area next to the eastern native bushes and only the goslings were pushing ahead, trying to feed.
This time they lined the eastern edge of the northern hillside, still keeping as close as they could to the destroyed area to which they have been confined during the BU Bridge construction. The gosling threesome walked up the hillside to the edge of the sidewalk, separated from it by the traditional metal fence and by the newer construction woven metal fence next to the sidewalk. All were feeding.
Most of the group stayed at the foot of the hill just north of the eastern beginning of a small vehicle highway.
This is the portion with the thickest of the introduced bushes / soon to be thicket.
A number of folks were admired the Charles River White Geese from the BU Bridge. Several came into the introduced zone, admiring and taking pictures.
These beautiful animals are and always have been highly popular with decent human beings. The problem is that tiny number of rotten individuals who are part of the corruption in the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The rotters recognize their popularity with their lies and lies of omission, with the fake group in the lead lying about their concern for the area and telling folks to look at everything else. After all, the Machine succeeded in massive, inexcusable destruction at Alewife using the same tactics. And the Machine insists reality, and the last twelve years, does not exist.
Eventually a couple of middle aged men with pots walked over the eastern highway branch to the edge of the gaggle. They stood there looking into the long time destroyed area. The geese suddenly gave the alarm and all rapidly retreated into the long time destroyed area.
The portion of the longtime destroyed area nearest to and just east of the soon to be impenetrable thicket is showing signs of grass growth, perhaps seed which blew there from the soon to be introduced thicket. Perhaps this is the end in this small area of the destruction of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its environmental destroyer, the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
As with last time, the three adolescent goslings were in the lead. They look quite a bit larger now. They were followed by the parents and baby sitter, plus about the same number of members of the gaggle as last time. The identifiable goslings were still yellow. There were some limited other members of the group which may have fuzzy and white and a bit larger. These, if my identification is accurate, would be slightly older goslings.
Once again, the Charles River White Geese did not venture far into the introduced vegetation, just further than the last time I saw them there. Last time, they were in the area next to the eastern native bushes and only the goslings were pushing ahead, trying to feed.
This time they lined the eastern edge of the northern hillside, still keeping as close as they could to the destroyed area to which they have been confined during the BU Bridge construction. The gosling threesome walked up the hillside to the edge of the sidewalk, separated from it by the traditional metal fence and by the newer construction woven metal fence next to the sidewalk. All were feeding.
Most of the group stayed at the foot of the hill just north of the eastern beginning of a small vehicle highway.
This is the portion with the thickest of the introduced bushes / soon to be thicket.
A number of folks were admired the Charles River White Geese from the BU Bridge. Several came into the introduced zone, admiring and taking pictures.
These beautiful animals are and always have been highly popular with decent human beings. The problem is that tiny number of rotten individuals who are part of the corruption in the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The rotters recognize their popularity with their lies and lies of omission, with the fake group in the lead lying about their concern for the area and telling folks to look at everything else. After all, the Machine succeeded in massive, inexcusable destruction at Alewife using the same tactics. And the Machine insists reality, and the last twelve years, does not exist.
Eventually a couple of middle aged men with pots walked over the eastern highway branch to the edge of the gaggle. They stood there looking into the long time destroyed area. The geese suddenly gave the alarm and all rapidly retreated into the long time destroyed area.
The portion of the longtime destroyed area nearest to and just east of the soon to be impenetrable thicket is showing signs of grass growth, perhaps seed which blew there from the soon to be introduced thicket. Perhaps this is the end in this small area of the destruction of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its environmental destroyer, the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Monteiro v. City of Cambridge: Some answers in Monday’s meeting
Yesterday, June 11, 2012, I printed advance information on a Cambridge City Council Finance Committee meeting concerning the case of Malvina Monteiro et al. v. City of Cambridge, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/cambridge-ma-usa-city-council-to.html.
Cambridge Day has given a report on the meeting, at http://www.cambridgeday.com/2012/06/11/councillor-gets-more-details-in-civil-rights-lawsuits-request-to-make-apology-waits/.
The short of the report is that the Kelley motion will be passed on to the full city council when the report of the finance committee is heard.
Some answers were provided to Kelley’s questions.
The Cambridge City Manager reported that $2,144,000 was paid in outside legal fees from the 1998 complaint to the 2008 trial which resulted in the very strong jury verdict against Cambridge and the Cambridge City Manager.
The outside legal costs for the appeal of the Superior Court verdict to the Appeals Court ran $488,409.
Further answers were promised by the Cambridge City Manager.
The Cambridge Day report is quite professional, quite detailed. I recommend it.
Cambridge Day has given a report on the meeting, at http://www.cambridgeday.com/2012/06/11/councillor-gets-more-details-in-civil-rights-lawsuits-request-to-make-apology-waits/.
The short of the report is that the Kelley motion will be passed on to the full city council when the report of the finance committee is heard.
Some answers were provided to Kelley’s questions.
The Cambridge City Manager reported that $2,144,000 was paid in outside legal fees from the 1998 complaint to the 2008 trial which resulted in the very strong jury verdict against Cambridge and the Cambridge City Manager.
The outside legal costs for the appeal of the Superior Court verdict to the Appeals Court ran $488,409.
Further answers were promised by the Cambridge City Manager.
The Cambridge Day report is quite professional, quite detailed. I recommend it.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Residents of Charles River at Home in Spite of Corrupt destruction of environment and heartless animal abuse
I have had several reports on both sides of the situation on the Charles River.
It is an easier report to gripe at the outrages especially since Cambridge’s very belligerent corruption is so major a part of an outrageous situation.
Nevertheless, these beautiful beings continue to live as best they can in spite of a tiny minority of corruption entities who have a greatly disproportionate and bad impact on them.
The tradition of corrupt behavior is a very major part of the problem in Cambridge, MA, USA, and it would appear to be key in keeping corrupt behavior controlling the Charles River.
But there is beauty on the Charles in spite of really destructive people.
Here are a number of photos. Most are photos taken a month ago, on May 13, 2012.
12 05-13-12 Charles S of DNA, Geese
This is the view most people now see of the Charles River White Geese since they are barred from direct contact through a decade of outrages.
This is the Charles River south of the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
Three geese, two near shore, one further out, are enjoying the beautiful water.
When you talk to the destructive people destroying the Charles, their idea of creating a swimmable Charles River altogether too often turns out to be a wall on introduced vegetation preventing access between the Charles River and Magazine Beach, a wall which the key state manager has bragged starves the Charles River White Geese.
14 05-13-12, Charles near BU Bridge S of Constr, Wh Ducks
These are two Charles River White Geese and two Charles River White Ducks.
The photo is of an area near the BU Bridge just south of the construction zone by the BU Bridge.
The Charles River White Ducks were dumped at Magazine Beach on July 22, 2006, the day before Friends of the White Geese conducted a five year memorial for Bumpy, the long time leader of the Charles White Geese who was assassinated by a repeat animal killer. The animal killer apparently progressed to rape and murder of a young woman at the location where he had been beating nesting Mother Geese to death.
These two beauties were so innocent when they were dropped off that they thought dogs were their friends, and they did not know what all that blue stuff was all about.
During our memorial for Bumpy, I saved the White Ducks from an attack by a dog sicced on them by a man passing by. I kicked the dog when he had the neck of one of the ducks in his mouth.
The leader of the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative, the feeders of the Charles River White Geese, taught the Charles River White Ducks what all that blue stuff was for by backing into the Charles River while feeding them. They loved the water once they got into it. CRUWI has been feeding waterfowl residents since Cambridge and the DCR starting their deliberate starvation attacks.
The first year they resided on the Charles, they lived in a native wild on the south side of the Charles in Boston. That native wild was apparently destroyed as part of the repeated environmental destruction by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
The Charles River Conservancy twice a year starting in 2003 has destroyed native vegetation lining the Charles needed for protection by migratory waterfowl. They destroy everything on the Charles River Basin except for the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.
They are consistent. They destroy as part of environmental destruction. They refrain from destroying the introduced thicket whose primary purposes is heartless animal abuse.
The Boston Conservation Commission has expressed shock at the destructiveness of this falsely named group.
SDC06246
Courtesy of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority who did photos of the event, here is a photo of the dog on attack.
DSC06209
And a more pleasant MWRA photo from the same day, before the attack. They were apparently dropped at the foot of this tree at the opening to the Magazine Beach parking lot. They stayed there waiting for their owner to return.
Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation are aberrations but very destructive aberrations with a massive, corrupt, group in Cambridge running around signing their false praises.
15 05-13-12 Charles S of const, barrier, geese
This is another view of the pretty much the same location as the third above, although a little to the east.
18 05-13-12 3 babies and parents in wasteland.
Here are three goslings and their parents and babysitter (one of the threesome is to the left). They are in an area which was lush with ground vegetation until the Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the DCR.
Needless to say, the Charles River “Conservancy” is not friendly to the animal population of the Charles River.
I reported a few reports ago of the incursion of a large group of Charles River White Geese into the area where the DCR is growing yet another impenetrable thicket. At the lead of the group were three adolescent goslings with their parents and baby sitter in tow. This threesome could be the same guys a few weeks earlier.
It is an easier report to gripe at the outrages especially since Cambridge’s very belligerent corruption is so major a part of an outrageous situation.
Nevertheless, these beautiful beings continue to live as best they can in spite of a tiny minority of corruption entities who have a greatly disproportionate and bad impact on them.
The tradition of corrupt behavior is a very major part of the problem in Cambridge, MA, USA, and it would appear to be key in keeping corrupt behavior controlling the Charles River.
But there is beauty on the Charles in spite of really destructive people.
Here are a number of photos. Most are photos taken a month ago, on May 13, 2012.
12 05-13-12 Charles S of DNA, Geese
This is the view most people now see of the Charles River White Geese since they are barred from direct contact through a decade of outrages.
This is the Charles River south of the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
Three geese, two near shore, one further out, are enjoying the beautiful water.
When you talk to the destructive people destroying the Charles, their idea of creating a swimmable Charles River altogether too often turns out to be a wall on introduced vegetation preventing access between the Charles River and Magazine Beach, a wall which the key state manager has bragged starves the Charles River White Geese.
14 05-13-12, Charles near BU Bridge S of Constr, Wh Ducks
These are two Charles River White Geese and two Charles River White Ducks.
The photo is of an area near the BU Bridge just south of the construction zone by the BU Bridge.
The Charles River White Ducks were dumped at Magazine Beach on July 22, 2006, the day before Friends of the White Geese conducted a five year memorial for Bumpy, the long time leader of the Charles White Geese who was assassinated by a repeat animal killer. The animal killer apparently progressed to rape and murder of a young woman at the location where he had been beating nesting Mother Geese to death.
These two beauties were so innocent when they were dropped off that they thought dogs were their friends, and they did not know what all that blue stuff was all about.
During our memorial for Bumpy, I saved the White Ducks from an attack by a dog sicced on them by a man passing by. I kicked the dog when he had the neck of one of the ducks in his mouth.
The leader of the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative, the feeders of the Charles River White Geese, taught the Charles River White Ducks what all that blue stuff was for by backing into the Charles River while feeding them. They loved the water once they got into it. CRUWI has been feeding waterfowl residents since Cambridge and the DCR starting their deliberate starvation attacks.
The first year they resided on the Charles, they lived in a native wild on the south side of the Charles in Boston. That native wild was apparently destroyed as part of the repeated environmental destruction by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
The Charles River Conservancy twice a year starting in 2003 has destroyed native vegetation lining the Charles needed for protection by migratory waterfowl. They destroy everything on the Charles River Basin except for the bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.
They are consistent. They destroy as part of environmental destruction. They refrain from destroying the introduced thicket whose primary purposes is heartless animal abuse.
The Boston Conservation Commission has expressed shock at the destructiveness of this falsely named group.
SDC06246
Courtesy of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority who did photos of the event, here is a photo of the dog on attack.
DSC06209
And a more pleasant MWRA photo from the same day, before the attack. They were apparently dropped at the foot of this tree at the opening to the Magazine Beach parking lot. They stayed there waiting for their owner to return.
Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation are aberrations but very destructive aberrations with a massive, corrupt, group in Cambridge running around signing their false praises.
15 05-13-12 Charles S of const, barrier, geese
This is another view of the pretty much the same location as the third above, although a little to the east.
18 05-13-12 3 babies and parents in wasteland.
Here are three goslings and their parents and babysitter (one of the threesome is to the left). They are in an area which was lush with ground vegetation until the Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the DCR.
Needless to say, the Charles River “Conservancy” is not friendly to the animal population of the Charles River.
I reported a few reports ago of the incursion of a large group of Charles River White Geese into the area where the DCR is growing yet another impenetrable thicket. At the lead of the group were three adolescent goslings with their parents and baby sitter in tow. This threesome could be the same guys a few weeks earlier.
Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council to consider Monteiro case again
1. Introduction.
2. City Manager Initiative.
3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule
4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.
5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.
6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.
1. Introduction.
I am informed by a supporter of Councilor Kelley that the Cambridge City Council sitting at its Finance Committee will be meeting this morning, June 11, 2012 at 9 am. They will be discussing the payments in the case of Malvina Monteiro and others v. City of Cambridge.
This is the case in which jury, judge and appeals court found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of department head (Cape Verdean, black, woman) Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The Kelley supporter has provided a number of documents which I appreciate and will pass on to you.
I will comment at the end.
2. City Manager Initiative.
The following was included in the City Manager’s communications to the Cambridge City Council, the “City Manager Agenda” for Monday, April 23, 2012:
15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.
The action at that time was :
15. REFERRED TO FINANCE COMMITTEE ON MOTION OF COUNCILLOR KELLEY CMA 2012 #99.”
The City Manager’s Letter of explanation read:
April 23, 2012
To the Honorable, the City Council:
As I have informed the City Council previously, the disbursement of funds for the legal matters resulting from the 1998 Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination claim was paid from the Statutory Budget Category of "Travel and Training" (Judgment and Damages), and, that the City's Free Cash balance of over $102 million dollars would be the source of these funds. In order for that Statutory Budget Category to conclude Fiscal Year 2012 "in balance" it is necessary to appropriate the funds from Free Cash to Judgment and Damages.
Thus, I am hereby recommending the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.
Very truly yours,
Robert W. Healy
City Manager
3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING JUNE 11, 2012
Monday, June 11, 2012, 9:00 am
The Finance Committee will conduct a public meeting to discuss an appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account and to discuss changing the Traffic Regulations in Appendix D, Schedule 13 by striking out the penalty fee of $30.00 and substitute in place the fee of $5.00 as it relates to Section 16.7 entitled "Street Cleaning".
(Ackermann Room)
Ed: The Ackerman Room is much smaller than the Cambridge City Council’s chambers. The meeting is scheduled during the day. Both strongly discourage public participation.
4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.
From: Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley [mailto:craigkelley62@Verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 12:30 AM
To: Interim City Clerk Donna Lopez; pcrane@cambridgema.gov
Subject: Monday's Finance meeting
Ladies:
I cannot make Monday’s meeting of the finance committee and would appreciate this letter being read and entered into the record.
Many thanks.
Craig
Dear Committee Members:
Because of Cooper’s ‘moving on’ ceremony today at 9 AM, I cannot make this meeting. I continue to be amazed that the City can spend millions and millions and millions of dollars on what started as a discrimination complaint and wound up as a wrongful termination complaint and no one ever has to say he, or she, is sorry, no one has to explain what processes and procedures have been put in place to keep the sort of behavior that resulted in this judgement from happening again and no one has been censured. I am not surprised that the Manager has not expressed regret for his actions as I think that he truly believes he did nothing wrong and that the case was decided incorrectly. I disagree, but at least I can follow his logic and if he feels he did nothing wrong I see no sense in expecting him to apologize for it. That the Council, as a body, feels no need to apologize to everybody involved, though, troubles me. At the end of the day, the Manager is an employee of the Council and we are responsible for his actions, both the ones with happy outcomes and the ones that are problematic.
I also still wonder how much the various aspects of these cases cost us. I would like to know how much:
1. We paid for outside legal counsel before our appeal of Ms. Montiero’s judgement
2. We paid for such counsel on the appeal of Ms. Montiero’s case
3. We paid for such counsel to handle the Wong and Stamper cases [ed: final two plaintiffs].
4. How much in extra costs- opponents legal fees, interest and so forth- as a result of our appeal of the Montiero verdict.
5. How much, in total (not counting City staff time) these cases cost us
6. If there were similar cases that the City also settled in any department
7. If there are similar cases pending in any department
I propose the following Order:
Whereas: A combination of discrimination and wrongful termination complaints have resulted in many millions of dollars of costs and damages for the City of Cambridge; and
Whereas: The actions that led to these complaints, plus the filing of the complaints and subsequent law suits, caused much anguish for the City employees involved; and
Whereas: It is not clear the that City Manager has ever apologized to the City of Cambridge or anyone else involved for any role he may have played in creating this situation; and
Whereas: It is not clear what practices and policies the City has instituted to help ensure that similar situations do not arise in the future; now be it therefore
Ordered: That the Council extend its apologies to both the City employees who filed the complaints and to the taxpayers and residents of the City of Cambridge for both the angst created by its employee, the City Manager, and the cost to the City as a result of these cases; and be it further
Ordered: That the Council hereby lets the City Manager know of its disapproval of his judgement and actions regarding this situation; and be it further
Ordered: That the City Manager be, and hereby is, requested to report back to the City Council with an explanation of what processes and procedures have been instituted to help ensure that such a situation does not arise in the future.
5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.
Councilor Kelley is a firm member of the Cambridge Machine with regard to environmental destruction and zoning machinations commonly written by the Cambridge City Manager’s people. Their zoning initiatives very frequently achieve the opposite of what they claim to be doing.
Kelley practices, and brags of, environmentalism, Cambridge style: Save the world, but how dare you discuss Cambridge destroying Cambridge.
6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.
Kelley has frequently been a minority of one on the Cambridge City Council concerning Monteiro. Interestingly, however, he was the swing vote on keeping records on the matter secret.
In Cambridge, swing votes can be much more important than being a minority of one on the “right side”. Nevertheless, Kelley’s “extreme” position for Cambridge is, nevertheless, way out of touch, far less than would be called for with regard to reality in the real world.
The jury in the Monteiro case said $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.
The trial judge described the City Manager’s behavior as “reprehensible.”
The appeals court panel refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion. The panel referred to “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.”
The Cambridge City Council is very clearly being told something.
The Monteiro decision is ample grounds for the Cambridge City Council to very safely fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office. Firing could, without question, be done without his golden parachute. Firing could possibly be done without pension. Except for the pension issue any court action by the Cambridge City Manager would be a clear waste of time.
2. City Manager Initiative.
3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule
4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.
5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.
6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.
1. Introduction.
I am informed by a supporter of Councilor Kelley that the Cambridge City Council sitting at its Finance Committee will be meeting this morning, June 11, 2012 at 9 am. They will be discussing the payments in the case of Malvina Monteiro and others v. City of Cambridge.
This is the case in which jury, judge and appeals court found that the Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of department head (Cape Verdean, black, woman) Malvina Monteiro in retaliation for her filing a civil rights complaint.
The Kelley supporter has provided a number of documents which I appreciate and will pass on to you.
I will comment at the end.
2. City Manager Initiative.
The following was included in the City Manager’s communications to the Cambridge City Council, the “City Manager Agenda” for Monday, April 23, 2012:
15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.
The action at that time was :
15. REFERRED TO FINANCE COMMITTEE ON MOTION OF COUNCILLOR KELLEY CMA 2012 #99.”
The City Manager’s Letter of explanation read:
April 23, 2012
To the Honorable, the City Council:
As I have informed the City Council previously, the disbursement of funds for the legal matters resulting from the 1998 Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination claim was paid from the Statutory Budget Category of "Travel and Training" (Judgment and Damages), and, that the City's Free Cash balance of over $102 million dollars would be the source of these funds. In order for that Statutory Budget Category to conclude Fiscal Year 2012 "in balance" it is necessary to appropriate the funds from Free Cash to Judgment and Damages.
Thus, I am hereby recommending the appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account.
Very truly yours,
Robert W. Healy
City Manager
3. City Council’s Hearing Schedule
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING JUNE 11, 2012
Monday, June 11, 2012, 9:00 am
The Finance Committee will conduct a public meeting to discuss an appropriation of $11,917,462 from Free Cash to the General Fund Law Department Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account and to discuss changing the Traffic Regulations in Appendix D, Schedule 13 by striking out the penalty fee of $30.00 and substitute in place the fee of $5.00 as it relates to Section 16.7 entitled "Street Cleaning".
(Ackermann Room)
Ed: The Ackerman Room is much smaller than the Cambridge City Council’s chambers. The meeting is scheduled during the day. Both strongly discourage public participation.
4. Letter from Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley.
From: Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley [mailto:craigkelley62@Verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 12:30 AM
To: Interim City Clerk Donna Lopez; pcrane@cambridgema.gov
Subject: Monday's Finance meeting
Ladies:
I cannot make Monday’s meeting of the finance committee and would appreciate this letter being read and entered into the record.
Many thanks.
Craig
Dear Committee Members:
Because of Cooper’s ‘moving on’ ceremony today at 9 AM, I cannot make this meeting. I continue to be amazed that the City can spend millions and millions and millions of dollars on what started as a discrimination complaint and wound up as a wrongful termination complaint and no one ever has to say he, or she, is sorry, no one has to explain what processes and procedures have been put in place to keep the sort of behavior that resulted in this judgement from happening again and no one has been censured. I am not surprised that the Manager has not expressed regret for his actions as I think that he truly believes he did nothing wrong and that the case was decided incorrectly. I disagree, but at least I can follow his logic and if he feels he did nothing wrong I see no sense in expecting him to apologize for it. That the Council, as a body, feels no need to apologize to everybody involved, though, troubles me. At the end of the day, the Manager is an employee of the Council and we are responsible for his actions, both the ones with happy outcomes and the ones that are problematic.
I also still wonder how much the various aspects of these cases cost us. I would like to know how much:
1. We paid for outside legal counsel before our appeal of Ms. Montiero’s judgement
2. We paid for such counsel on the appeal of Ms. Montiero’s case
3. We paid for such counsel to handle the Wong and Stamper cases [ed: final two plaintiffs].
4. How much in extra costs- opponents legal fees, interest and so forth- as a result of our appeal of the Montiero verdict.
5. How much, in total (not counting City staff time) these cases cost us
6. If there were similar cases that the City also settled in any department
7. If there are similar cases pending in any department
I propose the following Order:
Whereas: A combination of discrimination and wrongful termination complaints have resulted in many millions of dollars of costs and damages for the City of Cambridge; and
Whereas: The actions that led to these complaints, plus the filing of the complaints and subsequent law suits, caused much anguish for the City employees involved; and
Whereas: It is not clear the that City Manager has ever apologized to the City of Cambridge or anyone else involved for any role he may have played in creating this situation; and
Whereas: It is not clear what practices and policies the City has instituted to help ensure that similar situations do not arise in the future; now be it therefore
Ordered: That the Council extend its apologies to both the City employees who filed the complaints and to the taxpayers and residents of the City of Cambridge for both the angst created by its employee, the City Manager, and the cost to the City as a result of these cases; and be it further
Ordered: That the Council hereby lets the City Manager know of its disapproval of his judgement and actions regarding this situation; and be it further
Ordered: That the City Manager be, and hereby is, requested to report back to the City Council with an explanation of what processes and procedures have been instituted to help ensure that such a situation does not arise in the future.
5. Evaluation of Councilor Kelley.
Councilor Kelley is a firm member of the Cambridge Machine with regard to environmental destruction and zoning machinations commonly written by the Cambridge City Manager’s people. Their zoning initiatives very frequently achieve the opposite of what they claim to be doing.
Kelley practices, and brags of, environmentalism, Cambridge style: Save the world, but how dare you discuss Cambridge destroying Cambridge.
6. Evaluation of City Manager’s Monteiro plaintiffs proposal.
Kelley has frequently been a minority of one on the Cambridge City Council concerning Monteiro. Interestingly, however, he was the swing vote on keeping records on the matter secret.
In Cambridge, swing votes can be much more important than being a minority of one on the “right side”. Nevertheless, Kelley’s “extreme” position for Cambridge is, nevertheless, way out of touch, far less than would be called for with regard to reality in the real world.
The jury in the Monteiro case said $1.1 million real damages, $3.5 million penal damages.
The trial judge described the City Manager’s behavior as “reprehensible.”
The appeals court panel refused to dignify Cambridge’s appeal with a formal opinion. The panel referred to “ample evidence [of] outrageous misbehavior.”
The Cambridge City Council is very clearly being told something.
The Monteiro decision is ample grounds for the Cambridge City Council to very safely fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office. Firing could, without question, be done without his golden parachute. Firing could possibly be done without pension. Except for the pension issue any court action by the Cambridge City Manager would be a clear waste of time.
Wednesday, June 06, 2012
Cambridge Machine flaunts photo of picnic area it is destroying. Omits the destruction part.
The lack of ethics of the Cambridge Machine is so extreme that it is silly to call the situation anything other than corruption.
The Cambridge Machine is fighting to destroy the picnic area on Magazine Beach at the foot of Magazine Street by destroying its parking. The Cambridge Machine is fighting to accelerate the heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese by replacing the area where they have nested for most of the past thirty years with an impenetrable thicket comparable to the bizarre wall they have installed between Magazine Beach and the Charles River.
The Cambridge Machine is following its standard tactics: lie about which side they are on and rein in well meaning people. They tell the well intended people to look at everything except what counts, and they destroy what they claim to value.
I have repeatedly gone through the tactics both on the outrages on the Charles River and at Alewife.
The Machine has created a fake blog which they named after Magazine Beach, lying that they are concerned about Magazine Beach and want to improve it. Since they do not want to know about the biggest problems at Magazine Beach because their friends have created those problems, the claims of concern are flat out lies.
The below photo is copied without permission under the fair use doctrine from this fraudulent website. I have obscured the face to protect a very certainly well meaning person. He clearly loves the area. The person is just another victim of a Cambridge Machine without shame.
I caught this picture on line at about 4:45 pm on Tuesday afternoon, June 5, 2012, working the Internet in Central Square, Cambridge, MA, USA. The machine has it posted at the top of its belligerently misleading “Magazine Beach” blog. By about 5:15 pm, I was sitting at the picnic table you see, making very certain the photo was of what I thought it was.
To the left of the picture is a tiny environmentally respectful parking lot covered by a magnificent canopy of trees. Little people use that parking lot to get to the picnic area. They clearly drive from underprivileged parts of the Boston area. If the Machine succeeds in destroying their parking, the Machine will have succeeded in destroying the picnic area.
The machine has been running around for months now, loudly proclaiming that they are fighting to improve a historical building to the right of the area in the photo. Their proclamations of concern for the historical building consistently lie about reality because they omit that they are destroying the parking lot needed for ready access to the historical building.
The ONLY time I have ever seen the Machine publicly state that it is fighting to destroying the parking lot was when the head of the falsely named Cambridgeport “Neighborhood Association” indignantly denied keeping it secret.
Use of this photo in this manner is a lie as big as using the name “Magazine Beach” on their blog, probably more so because they clearly are lying that they love this specific location and lying that they are friends to this specific location.
Destroying its parking is antithetical to flaunting this photo.
The corruption of these people in the use of this photograph to communicate exactly the opposite of their real intentions is corruption par excellence.
The corruption of these people in using this person who clearly loves this area to destroy this area is corruption par excellence.
The Cambridge Machine is fighting to destroy the picnic area on Magazine Beach at the foot of Magazine Street by destroying its parking. The Cambridge Machine is fighting to accelerate the heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese by replacing the area where they have nested for most of the past thirty years with an impenetrable thicket comparable to the bizarre wall they have installed between Magazine Beach and the Charles River.
The Cambridge Machine is following its standard tactics: lie about which side they are on and rein in well meaning people. They tell the well intended people to look at everything except what counts, and they destroy what they claim to value.
I have repeatedly gone through the tactics both on the outrages on the Charles River and at Alewife.
The Machine has created a fake blog which they named after Magazine Beach, lying that they are concerned about Magazine Beach and want to improve it. Since they do not want to know about the biggest problems at Magazine Beach because their friends have created those problems, the claims of concern are flat out lies.
The below photo is copied without permission under the fair use doctrine from this fraudulent website. I have obscured the face to protect a very certainly well meaning person. He clearly loves the area. The person is just another victim of a Cambridge Machine without shame.
I caught this picture on line at about 4:45 pm on Tuesday afternoon, June 5, 2012, working the Internet in Central Square, Cambridge, MA, USA. The machine has it posted at the top of its belligerently misleading “Magazine Beach” blog. By about 5:15 pm, I was sitting at the picnic table you see, making very certain the photo was of what I thought it was.
To the left of the picture is a tiny environmentally respectful parking lot covered by a magnificent canopy of trees. Little people use that parking lot to get to the picnic area. They clearly drive from underprivileged parts of the Boston area. If the Machine succeeds in destroying their parking, the Machine will have succeeded in destroying the picnic area.
The machine has been running around for months now, loudly proclaiming that they are fighting to improve a historical building to the right of the area in the photo. Their proclamations of concern for the historical building consistently lie about reality because they omit that they are destroying the parking lot needed for ready access to the historical building.
The ONLY time I have ever seen the Machine publicly state that it is fighting to destroying the parking lot was when the head of the falsely named Cambridgeport “Neighborhood Association” indignantly denied keeping it secret.
Use of this photo in this manner is a lie as big as using the name “Magazine Beach” on their blog, probably more so because they clearly are lying that they love this specific location and lying that they are friends to this specific location.
Destroying its parking is antithetical to flaunting this photo.
The corruption of these people in the use of this photograph to communicate exactly the opposite of their real intentions is corruption par excellence.
The corruption of these people in using this person who clearly loves this area to destroy this area is corruption par excellence.
Tuesday, June 05, 2012
Fake Neighborhood Association presents fake minutes on their latest meeting.
1. General.
2. Failure to mention the fake history of Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area which omitted the last 12 years.
3. Report omitted on the accelerating destruction at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
4. Report on moneys for the foot of Magazine Beach fails to mention the fought for destruction of the tiny parking lot so valuable to that part of Magazine Beach.
5. Stacked survey whose responses, even with the stacking, damned the destruction on the Charles River omitted.
6. On line honest report.
7. Cooing about the environmentally destructive Mayor Davis and the environmentally destructive Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. Prediction.
9. Summary.
1. General.
Last evening, June 4, 2012, the fake neighborhood association submitted its fake report on the most recent “meeting” of the group.
As usual, when dealing with the Cambridge Machine, the most important stuff is the omissions. After all, the Cambridge Pols lie through omissions that Cambridge and its fake groups are worthy of the respect they insist they deserve.
2. Failure to mention the fake history of Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area which omitted the last 12 years.
Key in the lies of omission was the failure to report on their presentation of a fake history of Magazine Beach and area. This is the fake history which did not include the record of the last twelve years and the shouting down of me when I tried to go into the last twelve years.
3. Report omitted on the accelerating destruction at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
Another lie of omission was the praise of one of their key people for the infliction of a soon to be impenetrable thicket on the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, her cooing at it beauty, and the shouting down of me when I pointed out that they are inflicting on the nesting area the same outrage which currently walls off the Charles River.
4. Report on moneys for the foot of Magazine Beach fails to mention the fought for destruction of the tiny parking lot so valuable to that part of Magazine Beach.
A report was made on the obtaining of funds to destroy the parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street needed for public access to the picnic area there and to the historical building there. Naturally, the part about the destruction of the parking lot was omitted as usual. The code words for destruction were used. Since they constantly lie by omission it is impossible to tell if a miracle occurred and the parties involved became decent human beings.
5. Stacked survey whose responses, even with the stacking, damned the destruction on the Charles River omitted.
Another lie of omission was their report on a survey they took on Magazine Beach. The survey did not make it into the report.
The survey, of course, was stacked, at minimum by the non stop lies that the situation at Magazine Beach is one to be proud of. Magazine Beach is still beautiful. The lies come from the mention of the beauty without mentioning the irresponsible destruction of the past twelve years. The destruction only did harm. The relatively few things good done in the last 12 years could have been done without the destruction.
And all the destruction was accomplished through lies or lies of omission.
The responses to the stacked survey they made on Magazine Beach were made without mentioning the fact that it was stacked.
Even with the stacking of the survey, the responses included a lot of people objecting to the wall of introduced bushes which prevent access to and from the Charles River / Magazine Beach. That was censored since the entire report was censored.
There was also strong comment during the discussions that small boats should be allowed to dock off Magazine Beach. I commented that the destruction of the last twelve years renders a boat dock useless which had been used for the better part of a century.
6. On line honest report.
My report on many lies of omission and other outrages at that meeting is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/meeting-of-fake-neighborhood.html.
7. Cooing about the environmentally destructive Mayor Davis and the environmentally destructive Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The thing which really stands out is part of their report on a presentation put on by the most environmentally destructive member of the Cambridge City Council, Mayor Davis who very much non stop lies that she is an environmental saint.
The key part read:
**********
The Mayor is not only promoting sustainability efforts within Cambridge city properties but also working with Harvard and MIT to create and export best green practices and sustainability innovations.
**********
I cannot comment on the accuracy of comments on THIS PERSON’s presentation since I did not dignify her comments with my presence, however, with regard to the glowing report on MIT’s green practices, please see my report posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/mit-reaffirms-support-for-destruction.html, concerning MIT’s public meeting on May 24, 2012. During that meeting MIT clearly communicated that MIT supports the destruction of hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River. This is the fake group’s idea of positive green practices.
At that meeting, MIT also praised the fake neighborhood association’s fight to keep up and expand the heartless animal abuse and environmental destruction at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. The form was the usual bit of knaves praising knaves and lying by omission.
8. Prediction.
I would anticipate that the lies of “concern” for Magazine Beach will stop abruptly after they have succeeded in destroying the parking at the foot of Magazine Street, after suppressing outrage on the introduction of the soon to be impenetrable thicket in place of thirty years of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The fake group has suppressed objection to irresponsible behavior at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area for almost all of its existence by ignoring it. They have nothing new to destroy, so they will return to support of irresponsible behavior by silence when they should be yelling.
This would parallel their part of the destruction at Alewife. They spent years helping it by telling people to talk with the fake group fighting for that destruction. Once destruction was in place, this fake group suddenly decided it had nothing to do with Alewife. That made any comments about the environmental destruction and mass animal killing out of order.
Afterthought: I said "lies of 'concern'". It is very hard to call an expression of concern a lie. However, when you combine the expression of concern with claims of wanting to make improvements, and combine that with suppression of the very real fact that the most important need for improvements is to undo the totally inexcusable destruction of the last twelve years, that is not concern in the minds of normal people.
9. Summary.
These controlled groups and their lies and lies of omission are a key reason Cambridge, MA, USA continues to be a corrupt world whose reality is strikingly different from what its many fake organizations present to the public. The report on the meeting fits the standard technique of lying to the public, presenting a world of saints whose relation to reality depends on whether or not you are interested in reality.
1. General.
2. Failure to mention the fake history of Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area which omitted the last 12 years.
3. Report omitted on the accelerating destruction at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
4. Report on moneys for the foot of Magazine Beach fails to mention the fought for destruction of the tiny parking lot so valuable to that part of Magazine Beach.
5. Stacked survey whose responses, even with the stacking, damned the destruction on the Charles River omitted.
6. On line honest report.
7. Cooing about the environmentally destructive Mayor Davis and the environmentally destructive Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8. Prediction.
9. Summary.
1. General.
Last evening, June 4, 2012, the fake neighborhood association submitted its fake report on the most recent “meeting” of the group.
As usual, when dealing with the Cambridge Machine, the most important stuff is the omissions. After all, the Cambridge Pols lie through omissions that Cambridge and its fake groups are worthy of the respect they insist they deserve.
2. Failure to mention the fake history of Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area which omitted the last 12 years.
Key in the lies of omission was the failure to report on their presentation of a fake history of Magazine Beach and area. This is the fake history which did not include the record of the last twelve years and the shouting down of me when I tried to go into the last twelve years.
3. Report omitted on the accelerating destruction at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
Another lie of omission was the praise of one of their key people for the infliction of a soon to be impenetrable thicket on the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, her cooing at it beauty, and the shouting down of me when I pointed out that they are inflicting on the nesting area the same outrage which currently walls off the Charles River.
4. Report on moneys for the foot of Magazine Beach fails to mention the fought for destruction of the tiny parking lot so valuable to that part of Magazine Beach.
A report was made on the obtaining of funds to destroy the parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street needed for public access to the picnic area there and to the historical building there. Naturally, the part about the destruction of the parking lot was omitted as usual. The code words for destruction were used. Since they constantly lie by omission it is impossible to tell if a miracle occurred and the parties involved became decent human beings.
5. Stacked survey whose responses, even with the stacking, damned the destruction on the Charles River omitted.
Another lie of omission was their report on a survey they took on Magazine Beach. The survey did not make it into the report.
The survey, of course, was stacked, at minimum by the non stop lies that the situation at Magazine Beach is one to be proud of. Magazine Beach is still beautiful. The lies come from the mention of the beauty without mentioning the irresponsible destruction of the past twelve years. The destruction only did harm. The relatively few things good done in the last 12 years could have been done without the destruction.
And all the destruction was accomplished through lies or lies of omission.
The responses to the stacked survey they made on Magazine Beach were made without mentioning the fact that it was stacked.
Even with the stacking of the survey, the responses included a lot of people objecting to the wall of introduced bushes which prevent access to and from the Charles River / Magazine Beach. That was censored since the entire report was censored.
There was also strong comment during the discussions that small boats should be allowed to dock off Magazine Beach. I commented that the destruction of the last twelve years renders a boat dock useless which had been used for the better part of a century.
6. On line honest report.
My report on many lies of omission and other outrages at that meeting is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/meeting-of-fake-neighborhood.html.
7. Cooing about the environmentally destructive Mayor Davis and the environmentally destructive Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The thing which really stands out is part of their report on a presentation put on by the most environmentally destructive member of the Cambridge City Council, Mayor Davis who very much non stop lies that she is an environmental saint.
The key part read:
**********
The Mayor is not only promoting sustainability efforts within Cambridge city properties but also working with Harvard and MIT to create and export best green practices and sustainability innovations.
**********
I cannot comment on the accuracy of comments on THIS PERSON’s presentation since I did not dignify her comments with my presence, however, with regard to the glowing report on MIT’s green practices, please see my report posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/mit-reaffirms-support-for-destruction.html, concerning MIT’s public meeting on May 24, 2012. During that meeting MIT clearly communicated that MIT supports the destruction of hundreds of excellent trees on Memorial Drive next to the Charles River. This is the fake group’s idea of positive green practices.
At that meeting, MIT also praised the fake neighborhood association’s fight to keep up and expand the heartless animal abuse and environmental destruction at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. The form was the usual bit of knaves praising knaves and lying by omission.
8. Prediction.
I would anticipate that the lies of “concern” for Magazine Beach will stop abruptly after they have succeeded in destroying the parking at the foot of Magazine Street, after suppressing outrage on the introduction of the soon to be impenetrable thicket in place of thirty years of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The fake group has suppressed objection to irresponsible behavior at Magazine Beach and the Nesting Area for almost all of its existence by ignoring it. They have nothing new to destroy, so they will return to support of irresponsible behavior by silence when they should be yelling.
This would parallel their part of the destruction at Alewife. They spent years helping it by telling people to talk with the fake group fighting for that destruction. Once destruction was in place, this fake group suddenly decided it had nothing to do with Alewife. That made any comments about the environmental destruction and mass animal killing out of order.
Afterthought: I said "lies of 'concern'". It is very hard to call an expression of concern a lie. However, when you combine the expression of concern with claims of wanting to make improvements, and combine that with suppression of the very real fact that the most important need for improvements is to undo the totally inexcusable destruction of the last twelve years, that is not concern in the minds of normal people.
9. Summary.
These controlled groups and their lies and lies of omission are a key reason Cambridge, MA, USA continues to be a corrupt world whose reality is strikingly different from what its many fake organizations present to the public. The report on the meeting fits the standard technique of lying to the public, presenting a world of saints whose relation to reality depends on whether or not you are interested in reality.
Saturday, June 02, 2012
Nesting area temporarily less bad for Charles River White Geese
Passing by the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese yesterday, June 1, 2012, I was pleased to see some whites exploring the introduced bushes.
This afternoon, June 2, 2012, the situation was impressive. The middle portion of the introduced bushes abutting the native vegetation on the northern side of the destruction zone was filled with White Geese.
The adults were exploring in a very large group, hesitating to go far into the new area. They sought safety in numbers.
Three adolescent goslings were more adventuresome. They were wandering further into the introduced bushes looking for food. They were accompanied by the usual threesome: mother, father and babysitter.
The situation inflicted on the Charles River White Geese by the bureaucrats and the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has been nothing less than outrageous. Starting in 2003, when the CRC started destroying the environment for the bureaucrats, all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse has been destroyed with very limited exception. Nothing grew back, so they would appear to have not only destroyed the ground vegetation but poisoned the ground. The entire area, formerly lush, was converted to an artificially created desert with no vegetation for protection or food.
The Charles River White Geese have been deliberately starved by the bureaucrats since September 2004 with the first of the many outrageous and bizarre projects at Magazine Beach. The introduced wall / impenetrable thicket has since then barred their access to their food for most of the last 30 years in the Magazine Beach playing fields.
The bizarre thicket / wall is the only bordering vegetation in the Charles River Basin which is not destroyed twice a year by the CRC. It has a purpose. The manager has bragged that it starves the Charles River White Geese.
The soon to be thicket, now, looks quite good but the branches of introduced bushes very clearly are growing rapidly and will soon intertwine. Grass has been sewn and is starting to grow. Grass is impossible in the rest of the area, given the outrages inflicted since the CRC started environmental destruction for the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Right now, the situation is good, but right now is the time to prevent the next outrage.
It is the published goal of the DCR to kill off all animals living in the Charles River Basin. The euphemism is “parkland” and their secret definition of “parkland.” Pretty much all projects are used by the DCR to forward their reprehensible goal of animal killing.
Just last fall, they succeeded in killing off hundreds of valuable, beautiful animals as part of their bizarre destruction at Alewife.
They are assisted by the con games of the fake groups, telling folks to look at everything except the important stuff. The fake neighborhood association has shouted down objection to heartless animal abuse.
As I left, one of the workers for the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative came in with food.
The Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative has been feeding the Charles River White Geese since the inflicted starvation started in September 2004.
And the most visible cheerleader, the Charles River “Conservancy” is seeking money from decent people to continue their fights for these outrages, while bragging of helping out swimming which, in turn translates into that outrageous introduced wall starving the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach.
This afternoon, June 2, 2012, the situation was impressive. The middle portion of the introduced bushes abutting the native vegetation on the northern side of the destruction zone was filled with White Geese.
The adults were exploring in a very large group, hesitating to go far into the new area. They sought safety in numbers.
Three adolescent goslings were more adventuresome. They were wandering further into the introduced bushes looking for food. They were accompanied by the usual threesome: mother, father and babysitter.
The situation inflicted on the Charles River White Geese by the bureaucrats and the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has been nothing less than outrageous. Starting in 2003, when the CRC started destroying the environment for the bureaucrats, all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse has been destroyed with very limited exception. Nothing grew back, so they would appear to have not only destroyed the ground vegetation but poisoned the ground. The entire area, formerly lush, was converted to an artificially created desert with no vegetation for protection or food.
The Charles River White Geese have been deliberately starved by the bureaucrats since September 2004 with the first of the many outrageous and bizarre projects at Magazine Beach. The introduced wall / impenetrable thicket has since then barred their access to their food for most of the last 30 years in the Magazine Beach playing fields.
The bizarre thicket / wall is the only bordering vegetation in the Charles River Basin which is not destroyed twice a year by the CRC. It has a purpose. The manager has bragged that it starves the Charles River White Geese.
The soon to be thicket, now, looks quite good but the branches of introduced bushes very clearly are growing rapidly and will soon intertwine. Grass has been sewn and is starting to grow. Grass is impossible in the rest of the area, given the outrages inflicted since the CRC started environmental destruction for the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Right now, the situation is good, but right now is the time to prevent the next outrage.
It is the published goal of the DCR to kill off all animals living in the Charles River Basin. The euphemism is “parkland” and their secret definition of “parkland.” Pretty much all projects are used by the DCR to forward their reprehensible goal of animal killing.
Just last fall, they succeeded in killing off hundreds of valuable, beautiful animals as part of their bizarre destruction at Alewife.
They are assisted by the con games of the fake groups, telling folks to look at everything except the important stuff. The fake neighborhood association has shouted down objection to heartless animal abuse.
As I left, one of the workers for the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative came in with food.
The Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative has been feeding the Charles River White Geese since the inflicted starvation started in September 2004.
And the most visible cheerleader, the Charles River “Conservancy” is seeking money from decent people to continue their fights for these outrages, while bragging of helping out swimming which, in turn translates into that outrageous introduced wall starving the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach.
Charles River “Conservancy” solicits environmental contributions; omits most of its record
1. Solicitation for funds.
2. The CRC’s record on “swimming” at Magazine Beach.
A. Impenetrable thicket walls off Charles.
B. Destruction of boat ramp.
C. Claims of allowing only water related uses on the Charles.
D. Barriers to the tiny opening.
E. Poisons.
F. Reduction in size of playing fields.
G. Heartless animal abuse.
3. Poisoning of the Charles River by dumping of prohibited Chemical on the banks of the river next to Massachusetts General Hospital.
4. Annual poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
5. Destruction of almost all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.
6. Fight for a new small vehicle highway on the Cambridge side of the Charles River.
7. Replacement of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese with an impenetrable thicket.
8. Plans to kill off all animals in the Charles River Basin.
9. Destruction of the Charles River White Geese.
10. The reality? Fake groups.
11. Summary.
1. Solicitation for funds.
I have received a solicitation for contributions from the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
It talks swimming in the Charles, swimming in the Charles, swimming in the Charles.
The following are but a sample of the omissions from this lovely solicitation of funds.
2. The CRC’s record on “swimming” at Magazine Beach.
In 2004 or 2005, this fake group conducted a “swim in” in the Charles River adjacent to the wasteland which had been the food of the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach.
The CRC bragged that this outrage would help swimming in the Charles River.
The following analysis will, for the most part, use “bureaucrats” to refer to the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The DCR does nothing near Cambridge without the overall blessing of Cambridge.
A. Impenetrable thicket walls off Charles.
This outrage has resulted in the walling off of Magazine Beach from the Charles River with an impenetrable thicket of introduced bushes, clearly invasive because they are so destructive to the native animal population. This impenetrable thicket starves the Charles River White Geese by blocking access from the Charles River to almost all of their 30 year food at Magazine Beach. The only opening has an obstacle course to prevent access from the river.
This outrage is the only bordering vegetation on the Charles which is not chopped down twice a year by the CRC. Nowhere in the solicitation for funds does the CRC mention that, twice a year, it destroys bordering vegetation needed for migratory waterfowl, all the bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin.
The bureaucrats installed this outrage in direct conflict with their stated goals for the area, a lawn to the Charles. The bureaucrats, as is too common, proved themselves liars.
The key bureaucrat has bragged that this outrage starves the Charles River White Geese. The leader of the CRC has expressed her disgust for these beautiful creatures. Expression of contempt for their victims is normal among abusive people. This sort of language, among other things, is used by wife beaters against their victims.
The Boston Conservation Commission had at least one opportunity to comment on the CRC’s destruction of protective vegetation. Members of the Boston Conservation Commission were disgusted with the CRC’s harm to migratory waterfowl.
B. Destruction of boat ramp.
The CRC’s beloved project at Magazine Beach destroyed the boat ramp which was at Magazine Beach for most of the last century.
They physically left the boat ramp there. This is the only opening in the impenetrable thicket.
All they did was make it inaccessible. They put in a narrow bridge as the only access from the parking lot. Then they put up barriers to make access to the bridge that much more difficult.
C. Claims of allowing only water related uses on the Charles.
The bureaucrats have been very indignant on this stuff. Their actions at Magazine Beach, yet again, prove them liars, as do their attacks on water related animals.
D. Barriers to the tiny opening.
The bureaucrats have installed more bushes on the land side of the bridge. These also are permitted to grow and grow and grow while the CRC destroys bordering vegetation twice a year.
It seems the Charles River White Geese were getting through the opening and feeding there. So the bureaucrats installed barriers.
E. Poisons.
An excellent example of the CRC’s love for swimming in the Charles is the poisons being dumped at Magazine Beach.
Those poisons are being dumped to keep alive sickly grass introduced by the bureaucrats.
They planted the sickly stuff to replace healthy grass which survived the better part of a century without poisons. But the bureaucrats destroyed the healthy grass, introduced sickly stuff and proceeded to dump poisons to keep the sickly stuff alive.
F. Reduction in size of playing fields.
One of the key lies from the bureaucrats at Magazine Beach was that they were “improving” the athletic fields.
The area devoted to athletic fields has been drastically reduced.
The downsizing of the playing fields was accomplished to create fancy drainage systems to drain off the poisons “needed” to keep alive the sickly grass which replaced the healthy, responsible grass which did not need poisons.
G. Heartless animal abuse.
The Charles River White Geese have been starved ever since by having their food at Magazine Beach denied to them by projects which exactly contradict so many lies.
Note, however, at Alewife, as part of that bizarre project, hundreds of resident animals were casually killed as part of the strip mine type development of acres of virgin woodlands.
3. Poisoning of the Charles River by dumping of prohibited Chemical on the banks of the river next to Massachusetts General Hospital.
The name of this chemical is “Tartan”. It is labeled with a prohibition against use near water.
The bureaucrats were distressed that their beloved poisons were not working as well as they would like. So they dumped Tartan on Ebersol Fields near MGH.
The next day, the Charles River was dead with algae poisoning from the Mass. Ave. Bridge to the harbor.
That outbreak reoccurs annually.
The CRC has no problem with this poisoning of the Charles.
4. Annual poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
In 2001 or so, there was a “public meeting” at one of the Charles River boat clubs to discuss what to do about the Canada Geese problem.
I was thrown out of it.
I did not and do not think there is a Canada Goose problem.
The meeting, I was told, was to discuss how to respond to the “problem.”
Any and discussion about whether a problem exists was censored and people talking reality were barred.
From then on, the CRC and the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals have run around in the spring poisoning the eggs of all the migratory waterfowl they could get away with.
No mention in their solicitation of their poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
5. Destruction of almost all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.
This was done in segments starting when the CRC took over environmental destruction for the bureaucrats.
Now the undestroyed native vegetation is limited to two areas next to the former construction zone, soon to come new impenetrable thicket, in the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
6. Support for the destruction of hundreds of healthy, excellent trees on the Cambridge side of the Charles River between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge.
The leader of the CRC gushes with admiration at this proposed massive tree destruction.
The bureaucrats sought Obama moneys for the purpose. They flat out lied that all the trees to be destroyed were sickly.
The bureaucrats proved their lie a lie by their filing on the project with the City of Cambridge.
The filing was provided to the Governor.
The Obama moneys were not provided.
But they are still looking.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology abuts the destruction area. They recently affirmed their support for the massive destruction. Their explanation? The bureaucrats do not have the money for the project.
YET.
6. Fight for a new small vehicle highway on the Cambridge side of the Charles River.
This would be built in the Charles River and on its banks. The lie used is “underpasses”.
This project has been started as part of the latest outrage at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, the soon to come impenetrable thicket to replace what was nests.
A joint committee of the state Department of Transportation and the DCR condemned the project as environmentally destructive.
The project would devastate the beautiful 104 tree grove at the Memorial Drive split.
The project would duplicate a highway on the Boston side which bears signs warning people not to be out at night. Reports of sexual assaults and mugging are frequent.
7. Replacement of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese with an impenetrable thicket.
About two-thirds of the Nesting was destroyed as part of the BU Bridge renovations. About a third of the destruction was gratuitous.
The native vegetation there functioned to protect the nests of the Charles River White Geese. Two groupings were not destroyed.
A responsible protector of the environment would simply plant grass and let the native vegetation expand to where it was before.
The introduced bushes are already spreading to interlock and create the same mess that has walled off Magazine Beach.
This was accomplished through lies of omission. They violated their trust and installed this outrage with no public input whatsoever.
8. Plans to kill off all animals in the Charles River Basin.
The euphemism is “parkland”. The definition is: no animals need apply.
Reality is that nature does not look like a garden. The Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese is the last remaining animal habitat on the Charles River. It is being destroyed piece by piece.
9. Destruction of the Charles River White Geese.
The Charles River White Geese have been immensely popular.
When the attacks by the bureaucrats started, the state got multiple calls of objection.
Their response?
They simply lied.
“No intent to harm” the Charles River White Geese.
The lie was repeated in the Boston Globe article on the beginning of the outrage at Magazine Beach. A photo of a tiny White Goose overwhelmed by construction equipment was printed with this lie next to it.
10. The reality? Fake groups.
The Charles River “Conservancy” and the local fake neighborhood association.
They are now, as with this outrageous funding letter, using the technique which destroyed acres at Alewife.
Fake groups loudly proclaiming love for the targeted area lying that people should chase their tails fighting about minor matters and lying by omission about the outrages they are fighting for.
This is a company union tactic, a tactic by which controlled entities lie to the Cambridge voters that the Cambridge government is worthy of their respect.
11. Summary.
I could go on.
And the Charles River “Conservancy” brags of fighting for swimming while seeking money from people who love the environment and love the Charles River.
2. The CRC’s record on “swimming” at Magazine Beach.
A. Impenetrable thicket walls off Charles.
B. Destruction of boat ramp.
C. Claims of allowing only water related uses on the Charles.
D. Barriers to the tiny opening.
E. Poisons.
F. Reduction in size of playing fields.
G. Heartless animal abuse.
3. Poisoning of the Charles River by dumping of prohibited Chemical on the banks of the river next to Massachusetts General Hospital.
4. Annual poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
5. Destruction of almost all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.
6. Fight for a new small vehicle highway on the Cambridge side of the Charles River.
7. Replacement of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese with an impenetrable thicket.
8. Plans to kill off all animals in the Charles River Basin.
9. Destruction of the Charles River White Geese.
10. The reality? Fake groups.
11. Summary.
1. Solicitation for funds.
I have received a solicitation for contributions from the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
It talks swimming in the Charles, swimming in the Charles, swimming in the Charles.
The following are but a sample of the omissions from this lovely solicitation of funds.
2. The CRC’s record on “swimming” at Magazine Beach.
In 2004 or 2005, this fake group conducted a “swim in” in the Charles River adjacent to the wasteland which had been the food of the Charles River White Geese at Magazine Beach.
The CRC bragged that this outrage would help swimming in the Charles River.
The following analysis will, for the most part, use “bureaucrats” to refer to the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The DCR does nothing near Cambridge without the overall blessing of Cambridge.
A. Impenetrable thicket walls off Charles.
This outrage has resulted in the walling off of Magazine Beach from the Charles River with an impenetrable thicket of introduced bushes, clearly invasive because they are so destructive to the native animal population. This impenetrable thicket starves the Charles River White Geese by blocking access from the Charles River to almost all of their 30 year food at Magazine Beach. The only opening has an obstacle course to prevent access from the river.
This outrage is the only bordering vegetation on the Charles which is not chopped down twice a year by the CRC. Nowhere in the solicitation for funds does the CRC mention that, twice a year, it destroys bordering vegetation needed for migratory waterfowl, all the bordering vegetation on the Charles River Basin.
The bureaucrats installed this outrage in direct conflict with their stated goals for the area, a lawn to the Charles. The bureaucrats, as is too common, proved themselves liars.
The key bureaucrat has bragged that this outrage starves the Charles River White Geese. The leader of the CRC has expressed her disgust for these beautiful creatures. Expression of contempt for their victims is normal among abusive people. This sort of language, among other things, is used by wife beaters against their victims.
The Boston Conservation Commission had at least one opportunity to comment on the CRC’s destruction of protective vegetation. Members of the Boston Conservation Commission were disgusted with the CRC’s harm to migratory waterfowl.
B. Destruction of boat ramp.
The CRC’s beloved project at Magazine Beach destroyed the boat ramp which was at Magazine Beach for most of the last century.
They physically left the boat ramp there. This is the only opening in the impenetrable thicket.
All they did was make it inaccessible. They put in a narrow bridge as the only access from the parking lot. Then they put up barriers to make access to the bridge that much more difficult.
C. Claims of allowing only water related uses on the Charles.
The bureaucrats have been very indignant on this stuff. Their actions at Magazine Beach, yet again, prove them liars, as do their attacks on water related animals.
D. Barriers to the tiny opening.
The bureaucrats have installed more bushes on the land side of the bridge. These also are permitted to grow and grow and grow while the CRC destroys bordering vegetation twice a year.
It seems the Charles River White Geese were getting through the opening and feeding there. So the bureaucrats installed barriers.
E. Poisons.
An excellent example of the CRC’s love for swimming in the Charles is the poisons being dumped at Magazine Beach.
Those poisons are being dumped to keep alive sickly grass introduced by the bureaucrats.
They planted the sickly stuff to replace healthy grass which survived the better part of a century without poisons. But the bureaucrats destroyed the healthy grass, introduced sickly stuff and proceeded to dump poisons to keep the sickly stuff alive.
F. Reduction in size of playing fields.
One of the key lies from the bureaucrats at Magazine Beach was that they were “improving” the athletic fields.
The area devoted to athletic fields has been drastically reduced.
The downsizing of the playing fields was accomplished to create fancy drainage systems to drain off the poisons “needed” to keep alive the sickly grass which replaced the healthy, responsible grass which did not need poisons.
G. Heartless animal abuse.
The Charles River White Geese have been starved ever since by having their food at Magazine Beach denied to them by projects which exactly contradict so many lies.
Note, however, at Alewife, as part of that bizarre project, hundreds of resident animals were casually killed as part of the strip mine type development of acres of virgin woodlands.
3. Poisoning of the Charles River by dumping of prohibited Chemical on the banks of the river next to Massachusetts General Hospital.
The name of this chemical is “Tartan”. It is labeled with a prohibition against use near water.
The bureaucrats were distressed that their beloved poisons were not working as well as they would like. So they dumped Tartan on Ebersol Fields near MGH.
The next day, the Charles River was dead with algae poisoning from the Mass. Ave. Bridge to the harbor.
That outbreak reoccurs annually.
The CRC has no problem with this poisoning of the Charles.
4. Annual poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
In 2001 or so, there was a “public meeting” at one of the Charles River boat clubs to discuss what to do about the Canada Geese problem.
I was thrown out of it.
I did not and do not think there is a Canada Goose problem.
The meeting, I was told, was to discuss how to respond to the “problem.”
Any and discussion about whether a problem exists was censored and people talking reality were barred.
From then on, the CRC and the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals have run around in the spring poisoning the eggs of all the migratory waterfowl they could get away with.
No mention in their solicitation of their poisoning of the eggs of migratory waterfowl.
5. Destruction of almost all ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.
This was done in segments starting when the CRC took over environmental destruction for the bureaucrats.
Now the undestroyed native vegetation is limited to two areas next to the former construction zone, soon to come new impenetrable thicket, in the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
6. Support for the destruction of hundreds of healthy, excellent trees on the Cambridge side of the Charles River between Magazine Beach and the Longfellow Bridge.
The leader of the CRC gushes with admiration at this proposed massive tree destruction.
The bureaucrats sought Obama moneys for the purpose. They flat out lied that all the trees to be destroyed were sickly.
The bureaucrats proved their lie a lie by their filing on the project with the City of Cambridge.
The filing was provided to the Governor.
The Obama moneys were not provided.
But they are still looking.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology abuts the destruction area. They recently affirmed their support for the massive destruction. Their explanation? The bureaucrats do not have the money for the project.
YET.
6. Fight for a new small vehicle highway on the Cambridge side of the Charles River.
This would be built in the Charles River and on its banks. The lie used is “underpasses”.
This project has been started as part of the latest outrage at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, the soon to come impenetrable thicket to replace what was nests.
A joint committee of the state Department of Transportation and the DCR condemned the project as environmentally destructive.
The project would devastate the beautiful 104 tree grove at the Memorial Drive split.
The project would duplicate a highway on the Boston side which bears signs warning people not to be out at night. Reports of sexual assaults and mugging are frequent.
7. Replacement of nests at the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese with an impenetrable thicket.
About two-thirds of the Nesting was destroyed as part of the BU Bridge renovations. About a third of the destruction was gratuitous.
The native vegetation there functioned to protect the nests of the Charles River White Geese. Two groupings were not destroyed.
A responsible protector of the environment would simply plant grass and let the native vegetation expand to where it was before.
The introduced bushes are already spreading to interlock and create the same mess that has walled off Magazine Beach.
This was accomplished through lies of omission. They violated their trust and installed this outrage with no public input whatsoever.
8. Plans to kill off all animals in the Charles River Basin.
The euphemism is “parkland”. The definition is: no animals need apply.
Reality is that nature does not look like a garden. The Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese is the last remaining animal habitat on the Charles River. It is being destroyed piece by piece.
9. Destruction of the Charles River White Geese.
The Charles River White Geese have been immensely popular.
When the attacks by the bureaucrats started, the state got multiple calls of objection.
Their response?
They simply lied.
“No intent to harm” the Charles River White Geese.
The lie was repeated in the Boston Globe article on the beginning of the outrage at Magazine Beach. A photo of a tiny White Goose overwhelmed by construction equipment was printed with this lie next to it.
10. The reality? Fake groups.
The Charles River “Conservancy” and the local fake neighborhood association.
They are now, as with this outrageous funding letter, using the technique which destroyed acres at Alewife.
Fake groups loudly proclaiming love for the targeted area lying that people should chase their tails fighting about minor matters and lying by omission about the outrages they are fighting for.
This is a company union tactic, a tactic by which controlled entities lie to the Cambridge voters that the Cambridge government is worthy of their respect.
11. Summary.
I could go on.
And the Charles River “Conservancy” brags of fighting for swimming while seeking money from people who love the environment and love the Charles River.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)