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.
Saturday, June 02, 2012
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)