Monday, July 15, 2019

Recent photos from SECRET destruction on Magazine Beach, courtesy Cambridge (MA, USA) City Council and friends..

Recent photos from SECRET destruction on Magazine Beach, courtesy Cambridge City Council and friends.

1. Prelude.  An environmentally destructive Cambridge City Council proves more lies at Magazine Beach.
2. Introduction.
3. Phil’s reports.
4. Addendum.

1. Prelude.  An environmentally destructive Cambridge City Council proves more lies at Magazine Beach.

This report has been posted by evolution.  Hopefully, this is the final stage of the evolution.

The Cambridge City Council has gone forward with its second SECRET destruction vote on the Charles River, directly and through praised destruction by its companion in environmental outrage, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recretation.

In the process, it seems to have increased the ongoing count of the outrageous tree destruction at Magazine Beach on the Charles River from 58 to 59.

Here is the most recent destruction by the Cambridge City Council, the DCR, and the fake protectors who hold down voters with their own corrupt tactics.  Details as presented by Phil Barber are in Section 3.

Here are the two trees of which we recently showed the stubs.  These have been marked by coloring by Phil Barber from an older photo.  These are UNDISCLOSED trees 57 and 58 in the plans which started with the DCR filing of plans with the Cambridge Conservation Commission to destroy 54 at Magazine Beach.  Those destruction plans were presented to the Cambridge City Council by our letter of June 6, 2017.  That report is posted at

Our continuing disclosure of these EXPANDING plans has been called “lies” by the presiding officer of the Cambridge City Council, another lie.  At the same time, the Cambridge City Council has lied about its own sainthood by yelling at constituents for tree destruction.  Most of constituents being yelled are far less irresponsible than the Cambridge City Council and its friends.

The before picture of those two trees, photo marked up by and taken by Phil Barber:

The second SECRET Cambridge City Council vote to directly fund destruction on the Charles has destroyed one ornamental next to the 80 year unused bathhouse at Magazine Beach.

Here is a photo of it from the photos which I took in preparing the 6/6/17 letter.  This doomed tree was, SURPRISE, included in the Cambridge Conservation Commission filing.


And here is tree 59 of the 54 announced by the DCR to the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  This is a magnificent Mulberry photograph from Phil Barber’s files.  The DCR filing is confusing.  I do not think this now destroyed mulberry is in the filing.  This destroyed tree is the one at the right in the photo, with many trunks.  The apparent failure to include this tree in the DCR filling with the Conservation Commission is failure to inform of destruction of a tree within the CCC responsibility and thus yet would appear to be another violation.

I remember the walkaround in which the DCR showed off its outrageous plans to the CCC.  I do not remember this tree being pointed out.  It is highly visible on the rise above the Charles River between the doomed and magnificent willow and the 80 year abandoned bathhouse.  So the apparent failure to include would not be just the usual carelessness.  My memory could be confused by a major disagreement on whether the TEN trees in the nearby threatened excellent grove were TEN or THREE as claimed by the DCR.

Have I missed an amendment to the filing?  Possibly.  I try to be on the mailing list for CCC meetings.  I may have not received an announcement of consideration, or it could have been the usual vague description.

Plus our YouTube report is another part of the reality which the presiding officer of the Cambridge City Council from his podium has called “Lies.”  There are many before and after pictures in that report demonstrating who is the liar.

This is our report on the internet on the hundreds of mostly excellent trees destroyed by Cambridge and the DCR in January 2016 on the Charles River between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.  This report includes its own prequil to the current ongoing outrage by the loudly and falsely claiming tree “protectors” of the Cambridge City Council.

2. Introduction.

Phil Barber has followed up on the following destruction by the Cambridge City Council and friends on Magazine Beach on the Charles River.

a. destruction by the Cambridge City Council in its second SECRET funding vote on the Charles river, and on

b. destruction blessed by the Cambridge City Council by not wanting to know what the project it is praising is doing, including in the area allocated for destruction by Department of Conservation and Recreation funds.

First of all, here is the formerly SECRET plans by the DCR and the fake “protectors” saying which area will be paid for by the other of the scoundrels.

The SECRET funding allocation was presented in one map by the City Council’s “kind of activist.”  To, hopefully, minimize confusion, I have divided it into three parts, two of which are being destroyed by the two Cambridge City Council SECRET votes this year.

The first third which I am showing (of the three parts) is the middle of the Magazine Beach destruction zone.  Area 1 seems to be the SECRET implementation of two votes this year.  Area 4 is DCR funding.  Thus, WHILE CONSTANTLY PRAISING DCR plans, the City Council claims to have no responsibility for the destruction it is praising.

I do not believe that area 3 has lifted the veil of SECRECY yet.  Since it includes the destruction of all but one of the trees in the little guys’ park, presumably this is destruction being praised by the Cambridge City Council while claiming to have no responsibility for the destruction it is praising.

Here is the eastern third of the Magazine Beach Destruction area.

The first SECRET vote paying for destruction on the Charles River at Magazine Beach funded heartless animal abuse as the destroyed boat dock at the far right marked "0".

This boat dock was originally destroyed during the 2000's to starve the Charles River White Geese by blocking access to their food of most of the last 38 years while retaining the boat dock.  Blocking access through the Boat Dock blocked the only access left by the construction of the outrageous Starvation Wall blocking the rest of the shore from the Magazine Beach playing fields, their home and food for most of the last 38 years.

This outrage was based on public promises by a governmental sanctified “Charles River Master Plan” and a “swim in” by one of the usual fake groups claiming that the construction would improve swimming.  The “improvement” blocked access and view of the Charles River from its banks along with the heartless starvation.  The Starvation Wall has been admitted by the DCR to be hated by users of Magazine Beach.

This latest machination of the project was repeatedly described as a new boat dock.  The City Council vote was based on an artist rendering which was obvious nonsense.

It is not a new boat dock.  What that project is doing is tossing money at the blockade from feeding which is targeted at the 37 year resident Charles River White Geese while making access worse.

The second SECRET vote would destroy part of the Starvation Wall while apparently putting in a new physical blockade at ground level to continue starvation just as effectively.

The SECRET changes that I recently identified with regard to the public plans brought destruction up to 58 trees (photos below).  I will have to compare this latest destruction.

This report has been delayed a few days as it is.  I am getting it out and will see the level to which this latest destruction is SECRET from previously announced (and hidden as much as possible) plans or not.  Phil's words are as stated.

I have edited Phil's July 8 and July 10 emails in together/  The edit includes one omission from his emails because it was away from the current City Council SECRET destruction, and I am doing way too much explaining as it is.

This publication of this report includes additional thinking going beyond the original presentation.

3. Phil’s reports.

Here's some pix from 7/7/19. The first one is the roots of the torn up ornamental we've corresponded about.

* * * * *

[Ed: A file photo of the ornamental from the photos I took for the 6/6/17 communication to the Cambridge City Council.  This destruction is in the second SECRET destruction paid for by the Cambridge City Council.  This destruction was in the area used for celebration of destruction several months ago.  More than half the participants / destruction funders denied that trees are being destroyed.


* * * * *

Second is the stump of the largest tree they took down at the river's edge, a large multi-trunked old mulberry. I suspect is was not "esthetic enough" to fit the "new & improved" park

* * * * *

[Ed: This is also part of the Cambridge’s City Council’s second SECRET funded destruction.  I asked Phil for more detail.  This was his response in his second email]

What a lot of weasels

I did find a photo of the destroyed mulberry. It's the big spreading one to the right

[Ed: I do not think this tree is in the 54 trees which the DCR informed the Cambridge Conservation Commission it intends to destroy.  This is the package which was the basis of my June 6, 2017 letter to the Cambridge City Council.  If not in this package, this destruction brings the Magazine Beach destruction up to 59, in addition to the hundreds destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.]

* * * * *

Equipment near the Magazine


Tree and brush removal near the Magazine


Just a general view of the reeds growing tall and very lush, unmolested so far. Did I send you the link to an article that suggests that Monsanto was behind recent campaigns to remove so-called invasives, to sell more of their carcinogenic herbicide?

* * * * *

[Phil provided me the following links with regard to the ongoing poisoning of the banks of the Charles River by the DCR and Cambridge:

OK, here's the info

The Troubles of “Invasive” Plants: Collateral Damage, Monsanto, and the Tragedy of Pinyon-Juniper eradication it's at

And another

Environmental activists claim “misguided war” on invasive plants is big business for Monsanto, glyphosate

One more

Ending The Toxic, Costly and Unnecessary War On Invasive Plants: Who Does The War Serve?

This is also interesting in a horrifying way:

Monsanto Roundup Is Used on Wildlands, but No One Knows How Much
Monsanto's herbicide incorporates a known carcinogen that is banned in the EU and elsewhere

California jury hits Bayer with $2 billion award in Roundup cancer trial

* * * * *

[Ed:   This type of vegetation was destroyed by the Cambridge City Council’s “kind of activist” with associated relocation of poisons to the Charles River.  The vegetation was and is part of a drainage system installed in the late 2000's destruction to drain off poisons first introduced on Magazine Beach as part of THAT outrage.

[Hopefully, the folly of her destruction will result in the drainage pit being reestablished.  IF CAMBRIDGE HAD A RESPONSIBLE CITY GOVERNMENT, the poisons being dumped on Magazine Beach would be ended and a responsible ecosystem restored.

[Instead we get these additional destructive SECRET projects and a city council lying it is saving trees by yelling at private owners almost all of whom are destroying much less than the trees Cambridge and the state are destroying and have destroyed on the Charles River.]

I believe these are the first two large trees I told you were cut down, when I sent photos of the mulch circles and wood chips. The leaning tree to the left is still standing so I am confident these highlighted in red are the ones.

[Ed:  Here is Phil's after photo, previously published.  The Magazine / Bath House he mentions above is in the right rear.  The two photos are taken from opposing sides of the destruction.  The buildings in the rear of the above photo are a Cambridge public school on the far side of Memorial Drive.

[This was the subject of a recent report.  This destruction is in the state funding area and, apparently SECRET from the destruction filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  This increases destruction to 58 with the Cambridge City Council doing non stop self congratulations on “saving” trees while being part of the outrage on the Charles River.]

4. Addendum.

Phil’s report ONLY includes activity to date.

Plans filed with Cambridge Conservation Commission show destruction of the magnificent Willow at southwest corner of playing field, southeast corner of central park.  This is now apparently designated to the Cambridge City Council, unless the DCR and friends decide to defer that and do it by the DCR.

Please see our 6/6/17 letter for much more destruction.

That is at  It is the baseline and will CONSISTENTLY BE IGNORED BY THE Cambridge City Council as they lie (to use the word of their chair) lie that they are environmental saints.

They do not want to know what they are doing on the Charles River, and other inconvenient locations, except when they ram through destruction as fast and as secretly as possible.

But then again, potential destruction has gone from 54 to 56 to 58 to 59.  Plus the hundreds previously destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.