Our last three posts addressed three aspects of the outrage on the Charles River in response to separate reports from the Cambridge City Manager.
In thinking matters over, we have expanded on that portion of the response concerning a supposed boat dock proposal. The response included a list of proposed actions. Regrettably, the list, while appearing massive, had omissions.
Following is our letter to the Cambridge City Manager and City Council delivered on October 12, 2017 to the City Manager and to the City Clerk for the City Council at its October 16, 2017 meeting. Internal reference language which makes sense in the hard copy has been modified to make sense in this format.
A short summation as to our reaction to the various parties is:
● pleasure at the performance of the Cambridge City Manager,
● displeasure as to the performance of the Cambridge City Council, and
● destructive hostility to the Department of Conservation and Recreation,
● with comparable negative feelings toward the Cambridge Development Department.
* * * *
RE: Supposed docking improvement at Magazine Beach, in context.
Gentlemen/Ladies:
1. Introduction.
2. Supposed Dock Improvements.
A. But the obstacles created in the 2000's are what destroyed use of the boat dock.
B. And the project would destroy a segment of the admittedly hated Starvation Wall which wall the DCR says physically cannot be destroyed.
3. Solution.
4. Documentation.
1. Introduction.
This letter responds to September 25, 2017, Agenda Item 15, and ours of September 28, 2017, posted as Communication 3 on October 2,2017, concerning these supposed docking improvement.
On thinking things over, the third portion of our September 28 letter could use elaboration. First of all, these multiple environmental outrages must be placed in perspective.
The keys here are the same keys involved in the outrageous destruction of hundreds of excellent trees east of the BU Bridge: fraud in government; fraud in robots controlled by government; a city council whose members bragged of environmental sainthood on the stairs of Cambridge City Hall on April 24, 2017, and then, as ITS FIRST ORDER PASSED, voted to destroy 56 mostly excellent trees on Magazine Beach, based on fraudulent “dead or dying” claims. The city council has sat on its hands since the “dead or dying” fraud was debunked by our 51 page report with more than 100 graphics on June 6, 2017. Through the City Council’s failure to correct its fraud induced outrages of April 24, 2017, the City Council has created a very clear impression that self-proclaimed declarations of environmental sainthood on April 24, 2017 were not true.
Key in the ongoing outrage are a tiny number of robots who lie that they are defending Cambridge, when in reality their strings are rather clearly pulled by the Cambridge Development Department (CDD), directly or otherwise.
City Manager DePasquale, for the first time since this outrage of company union “protective” groups started in 1974, has stood above this continuing outrage.
The City Manager has explicitly informed the City Council that he will implement the City Council’s decision for destruction of those 56 mostly excellent trees at Magazine Beach, but the City Manager has made it very clear that the responsibility for that outrageous decision will be that of the Cambridge City Council.
The City Council can no longer hide behind the City Manager.
2. Supposed dock improvement.
A. But the obstacles created in the 2000's are what destroyed use of the boat dock.
Here is the CDD / Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) depiction of a supposed docking improvement at Magazine Beach next to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority sewerage treatment plant.
The Cambridge City Manager proposed to the City Council analyses coming from the CDD concerning Charles River. This looks like a common dirty trick was played by the CDD in which public (and City Manager?) input was obtained with the usual lack of meaningful communication about what was really being voted on.
This project is a supposed boat docking improvement on Magazine Beach. This “improvement,” if real, would reverse the destruction of free boat docking at this location in the 2000's. That free docking existed in that very location for most of the 20th Century. Both the destruction of the free boat docking and the “improvement” are joint projects of the CDD and the DCR (destruction by the latter’s predecessor). The 2000's project was directly managed by Mr. Rossi before assuming the City Manager position.
The depiction on page 1 is strikingly different from the situation at the proposed project. It seems strikingly different from prior depictions which implied vegetation on both sides of the project. Prior depictions showed the existing vestigial boat dock opening having added to its west the structure shown in the depiction, which was, most definitely, not as large above ground. The previous communications gave the impression that this would be a small structure replacing a segment of the Starvation Wall and that the new structure would be installed west of the opening.
This supposed new boat dock on the Magazine Beach playing fields near the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority plant is an excellent example of why the DCR should receive the same summary disposition on the Charles River as the Metropolitan District Commission from which the DCR’s “planners” came. Irresponsible plans have already been massively implemented with the destruction of hundreds of excellent trees east of the BU Bridge, and with “replacements” inferior to that destroyed. Coordination, of course, with the CDD.
The 20th Century boat dock was destroyed by the installation of the Starvation Wall, plus fabricated wetlands, plus a flimsy bridge. The 20th Century Boat Dock, itself, was not really harmed. What was destroyed was access.
The Starvation Wall is the MDC / CDD implementation of promises of a “lawn to the river” in the Charles River Master Plan Not unusual fraud from the MDC / DCR and the CDD. The “plan” was amended to reflect reality after the fraud had served its purpose.
The brown opening is the vestigial remnants of the boat dock of the 20th Century. Directly north of the boat dock is the bridge over introduced wetlands which, combined with the Starvation Wall, prevent access to the boat dock. Directly north of the bridge is the parking lot of Magazine Beach.
Below is a photo of an adult woman standing in that opening.
Plans which have been presented elsewhere show the proposed structure to the right of the woman on top of part of the Starvation Wall.
Below is a view of the bridge leading to the opening.
The plans previously shown by the DCR show the dock structure to the right of the opening, on top of Starvation Wall.
Here is the end of the bridge toward the parking lot.
That is Starvation Wall to the right / west of the far end of the silly but very effectively obstructive bridge.
Moving further back from this opening, above is a view of the vegetation which has been installed in this area. The reality is that this mess was created in two stages. The Charles River White Geese loved the water structure over which the bridge was originally placed, and walked through the area to get food. Below is a shot from the parking lot.
So, inasmuch as heartless animal abuse is the overwhelming purpose of the Starvation Wall as part of the DCR’s goal of killing off or driving away all resident animals, and the Charles River White Geese were getting food through there even after the first stages of the 2000's outrage, Cambridge and the DCR installed this massive introduced vegetation.
In the process of starving the Charles River White Geese, Cambridge and the DCR rendered the 20th Century boat dock unusable.
But the depiction of the supposed boat dock shows no vegetation.
Here is a photo of the artificially created wetlands at the flimsy bridge created in the 2000's which, together with the vegetation introductions, prevents use of the 20th Century Boat Dock.
Previously shown depictions show the boat dock opening with the structure to the right on top of existing vegetation.
Is this supposed boat dock just an additional obstacle to boats and to the Charles River White Geese? If the obstacles are still there, the DCR and CDD are just lying, as usual, about a boat dock.
The nicest thing that can be said about the boat dock depiction, with all that destroyed vegetation showing, is that it is looks like the usual fraud.
Links to citations are in the final section of this report.
We have provided photos of all the excellent trees the Cambridge City Council wants to destroy at Magazine Beach. We have effectively belied the claim of “dead or dying” included in order 1 of April 24, 2017, apparently written by the CDD.
B. And the project would destroy a segment of the admittedly hated Starvation Wall which wall the DCR says cannot physically be destroyed.
This latest item in the destruction at Magazine Beach is described as a “canoe and kayak launch.” It is stated to be near the Mass. Water Resources Authority sewerage treatment plant east of the Magazine Beach recreation area. Tree destruction was tossed into the description several levels down in the analysis. In striking contrast to the 56 tree destruction, we are aware of no meaningful explanation of what trees are being destroyed. And the photo like depiction provided has no known relationship to the area where this item has been proposed to go.
Is it the intent to destroy all this crap? Destroy all this crap, and you do not need that structure, whatever it is. Destroy all this crap, and the situation before the 2000's outrages would be restored.
Here are photos of the starvation wall from the Magazine Beach side.
The Starvation Wall was introduced in the 2000's by Cambridge and the DCR with the promise of a “lawn to the river.” Just the usual fraud. The falsely named “Charles River Conservancy” even conducted a swim-in to brag about the improvement to swimming off the Playing Fields.
The Starvation Wall runs from the MWRA property almost to the excellent Willow which the City Council voted to destroy in the April 24, Order 1 vote.
Here is a photo of the excellent tree at the western end of the wall, which excellent tree is now doomed, as one of the so many excellent trees the Cambridge City Council wants destroyed.
The DCR admits that the Starvation Wall is held in contempt by the public visiting the Magazine Beach playing fields. The DCR refuses to get rid of the Starvation Wall. The closest the DCR comes to praising this outrage is a claim that the DCR is not physically capable of tearing the Starvation Wall down. This project proves this DCR statement to be yet another lie coming from an entity which is not fit to be trusted.
The dock proposal would tear down and remove what appears to be a vast amount of vegetation including that portion of the Starvation Wall to the right of the woman in the picture. Destruction would include not particularly specified trees.
The boat dock proposal is just another admission of flat out fraud since it would destroy part of the supposedly not destroyable Starvation Wall.
Frauds of omission are a normal problem when dealing with the DCR and the CDD. Would the boat dock entrance be rendered a new obstacle to the Charles River White Geese? Would that massive structure or some other secret part of the package achieve this latest outrage. Right now, this opening is the only accessible part for them at the shore, even though they can go no further.
The real obstacle to resident animals AND TO BOATS is the bizarre bridge inside of the opening, the artificially created wetlands, the Starvation Wall, and all that other introduced vegetation. The CDD photo / diagram gives the impression that a massive amount of nonsense in this area is being destroyed. Is this depiction just another lie?
This Starvation Wall has value to these heartless animal abusers whose goal is to kill off or drive away all resident animals in this part of the Charles River.
Which trees are to be destroyed by the dock project appears to be totally secret, along with any claim of “dead or dying.”
Or rather, the real claim of the DCR’s fraudulent word game fighting for tree destruction at Magazine Beach was that there are trees there in “decline.” “Decline” was skillfully fraudulent on its own. In Order 1 of April 24, 2107, the CDD apparently reworded that fraudulent word game to the flat out fraud, “dead or dying,” lying that all 56 targeted trees are “dead or dying.”
And the 36 year residence at Magazine Beach of the beloved Charles River White Geese, the obvious target of these outrages, is a lot better established than this bizarre wall.
The DCR admits that their supposedly untouchable Starvation Wall is hated by thoughtful human beings. By contrast, the 36 year resident Charles River White Geese have PROVEN value as targets for visitors, and they are genuinely loved by those familiar with them.
3. Solution.
The DCR is simply no more fit to manage the environment of the Charles River than was its predecessor, and the reality of this proposal is yet another reason to trash the DCR in favor of the responsible alternative, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. The terrible planners of the MDC simply moved to the DCR with their irresponsible plans and are destroying, destroying and destroying, with those plans, and with the irresponsible CDD.
● The Cambridge City Council should have the legislature get rid of the DCR and replace it with a body which, while not perfect, is clearly worthy of respect, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
● The outrages of the 2000's must be reversed, not made worse by the fraud induced Order 1 of April 1, 2017.
● Poisoning of the banks of the Charles River must end.
● The playing fields must be returned to the banks of the Charles River by the well deserved destruction of the generally hated Starvation Wall. Restoration of the Playing Fields should occur along with restoration of access to their 36 year home by the Charles River White Geese who should be treated as the tourist attraction they very truly are..
● The irresponsible project supported by the fraud induced Order 1 of April 24, 2017, must be terminated along with the dock proposal, unless it turns out to have some sort of responsible value.
● Cambridge’s Company Union “protective” groups outrage must be ended.
● Free animals must be treated with love and respect due members of our so heavily threatened world.
● Addressing the City Manager, this is a situation of fraudulent word games by the DCR becoming flat out fraud when translated by the CDD. This fraud is yet another reason to prune the CDD. As noted, however, we appreciate the difference acknowledged by the City Manager in his signatures of the three documents.
3. Documentation.
A. Report at the June 6, 2017, demonstrating fraud in the “dead or dying” claim in April 24, 2017 Order 1: http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=1815&Inline=True, pages 198 to 249. This file is part of a 500 page or so file containing all of the documentation of the June 6, 2017 meeting. As a result, it is a painfully slow download. The author would be pleased to provide 5 PDF, email sized, copies. Request to boblat@yahoo.com.
B. The 2016 outrages between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge. Please note that the City Manager negatively referred to is Mr. Rossi, the predecessor of Mr. DePasquale, but also note the deafening silence of the Cambridge City Council when it was simultaneously yelling at circuses traveling on the public highway, and had been receiving multiple email notices per week about that ongoing outrage.
Video on destruction, “The Destruction of Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA, USA, January - February 2016, Final Cut”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o. A physical DVD copy of this report has been formally provided to each and every incumbent City Councilor.
Video on “improvements,” “Nature and beauty ripped out along the Charles River”: https://youtu.be/dWyCdcWMuAA. Official record copy provided to the City Council.
Sincerely,
Robert J. La Trémouille,
Individually, and as Chair,
Friends of the White Geese
