Charles River: Govt. Poisons, Algae Blight related to poisons, persist.

Charles River:   Govt. Poisons, Algae Blight related to poisons, persist.


1. Damnable “protective” entities persist in destruction.  Stage 1.
2. Damnable “protective” entities persist in destruction.  Stage 2.
3. The legislature tries to protect the Charles River from the vile MDC.
4. Damnable “protective” entities persist in destruction.  Stage 3.
5. Technical details to follow, one photo.


1. Damnable “protective” entities persist in destruction.  Stage 1.

Over the past month or so, there has been considerable “concern” expressed over the dead situation on the Charles River, a massive presence of algae.

The algae blight stems back to the first year the “right kind of people” conducted a “Charles River Swim.”

The “right kind of people” persist in constant nonsensical proclamations along with assisting very major destruction.

The biggest problem on the Charles River are destructive state and Cambridge governmental agencies patting each other on the back and sharing in making things worse.

These entities see nothing wrong with dumping poisons on the banks of the Charles River.

The algae blight stems back to their beloved poisons.  Before these destructive people started poisoning Magazine Beach, the Metropolitan District Commission / Department of Conservation and Reservation got frustrated with the failure of its beloved poisons at Ebersol Fields on the Boston side of the Charles River near Massachusetts General Hospital.

The MDC / DCR addressed their problem.  They dumped more poisons on Ebersol Fields.  These poisons were marked “Do not use near water.”

THE NEXT DAY, the Charles River was dead from Boston Harbor to the Mass. Ave. Bridge.  The Mass. Ave. Bridge is the second bridge outbound from Ebersol Fields and the bridge before the BU Bridge.  The BU Bridge is next to the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, and just before the REPEATEDLY attacked Magazine Beach.

As predicted at the time of the first algae infestation, the Algae infestation recurred annually, a day at a time.

2. Damnable “protective” entities persist in destruction.  Stage 2.

In the 2000's, the MDC / DCR along with the City of Cambridge, “improved” Magazine Beach.  Key parts of the “improvements” directly violated their beloved “Charles River Master Plan.”  The violations were heartless abuses of the Charles River White Geese, designed to starve them and to poison them.

For the first time, poisons beloved to the MDC / DCR and the City of Cambridge were dumped on the banks of the Charles River at Magazine Beach.

These destructive people had a solution.  They spent money putting in drainage pits (swails) to drain off poisons they should not be using on the banks of the Charles River.  These drainage facilities, in addition to providing money for contractors, drained off poisons which should not even be used on the banks of the Charles River.

3. The legislature tries to protect the Charles River from the vile MDC.

The legislature destroyed the MDC and split its responsibilities on the Charles River with the Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Department of Transportation.

The “planners” the legislature were trying to protect the Charles River from moved to the DCR with their vile plans.

They, together with the City of Cambridge, have done terrible things on the Charles River.

The Department of Transportation has been the adult in the room.  It has stood up to the vile DCR and Cambridge on key attempted outrages.

4. Damnable “protective” entities persist in destruction.  Stage 3.

There are a lot more outrages than the one which is the subject of this post.  To avoid writing a book, this post is primarily concerned with the ongoing poisoning of the Charles River.

The DCR, Cambridge and friends blocked the drainage pits.  The key person is constantly praised by the Cambridge City Council.  She has been called their “kind of activist” from the floor of the City Council.  She has a very bad record of telling people not to look at outrages.  She, in fact, has a pattern of praising outrages WHILE KEEPING THE DESTRUCTIVENESS SECRET.

With regard to the poisoning of the Charles, she has managed the blocking of the poison drainage using “volunteers” apparently supplied by the DCR.  Decent people assuming that vile entities who are praised for the opposite of their record, are responsible people.

And they assume that the praisers are also worthy of respect.  After all, do they not run around bragging about their sainthood.

So the poisons which were being drained off by the EXPENSIVELY CREATED drainage pits have been blocked from the drainage pits.

There is only one place for the poisons to go, the Charles River.

And the Charles River is now dead for something like a month, poisoning living beings who drink from it.

5. Technical details to follow, one photo.

Here is a photo of the blocking of the poison drainage WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE.  PHOTOS CAN BE PROVIDED of Cambridge assistance, and I believe I have seen the assistance documented by the City Manager to the City Council.

This photo was taken on December 7, 2017.  The time this added outrage took to destroy the Charles River seems proportional.

Nature stands up to outrages as much as it can, even from people falsely calling themselves environmental saints.  Nature does not listen to nonsensical propaganda, but nature can only withstand so much destruction.

Cambridge MA, USA, City Council increases support of pending Charles tree destruction from 59 to more than 159.

Cambridge MA, USA, City Council increases support of pending Charles tree destruction from 59 to more than 159.

1. The Latest Cambridge City Council Action.
2. The legislature’s Intention on the Charles River Should be Fulfilled.
3. The Latest Outrage.
4. Part of the Record of Cambridge City Council Outrages.
5. The Plans.
6. Some of the Victims.
7. Subway Maneuverings.  Another bizarre project which has lost, but which is part of the latest outrage, anyway..
8. MassDOT is standing up to the Cambridge “Planners” and Friends.
9. Green Line A.


1. The Latest Cambridge City Council Action.

Members of the Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council constantly present themselves as environmental saints.

All nine City Councilors, by passing Order 24 on July 30, 2019, have increased currently pending tree destruction supported by them on the Charles River from 59 to more than 159.  But there are members who still call themselves environmental saints.

This ongoing destruction  is, of course, in addition to the outrage of January 2016, in which more than 150 mostly excellent trees were destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges by Cambridge and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  The DCR has bragged that this destruction was for bike highway construction.  That DCR statement has been called a lie from the City Council chair by the City Council’s presiding officer.  The presiding officer has insisted that NO TREES HAVE BEEN DESTROYED for gilded highway construction on the Charles River and, at minimum, gave the impression that none will be.

This blog report is based on a letter I have delivered for presentation to the Cambridge City Council at its next meeting.  It follows on and provides more detail on my verbal objections at the July 30, 2019 Cambridge City Council meeting.

The only other comment on order 24 at the July 30 meeting responded to my objections against tree destruction..  That comment said all that needs to be said in response to the nonsense from the City Council’s presiding officer that bike highways do not destroy trees.  It was from a destructive bike activist.

Order 24 concerned the next phase in Charles River destruction.  It is called Phase III of Memorial Drive work by the DCR.  The key resolved paragraph  in Order 24 reads as follows:

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record in support of:
• Increasing the amount of dedicated space along the entire project area that is allocated
to sustainable modes of transportation, such as walking, cycling, and micromobility
devices, so it is more in balance with other modes
• Protecting and preserving all healthy, mature trees along Memorial Drive
• Planting as many new trees as possible; and be it further

The key part of this nonsense is “preserving . . . healthy, mature trees.”

This language supports destruction of the thick woods between the Grand Junction railroad and the BU Boathouse.  This language defines this thick woods as lacking “mature” trees.  Therefore nine City Councilors supported the destruction of this excellent woods minus one tree, in accordance with the DCR January 2016 outrage plans, as copied below, AND THE PUBLICLY PRESENTED PLANS OF THE DCR THIS YEAR.

That destruction would be done as part of the continuing environmental destruction on the Charles River to create gold plated highways of one sort or another, and the resolve supports all such nonsense no matter how destructive with VERY LIMITED SUPPOSED EXCEPTIONS.

2. The legislature’s Intention on the Charles River Should be Fulfilled.

The construction supported by NINE CITY COUNCILORS exactly fits one reason for the legislature’s destruction of the DCR’s predecessor, the Metropolitan District Commission.  The latest outrage is clearly supported by the language of the resolve.

The responsible alternative to this outrage is to implement the vote of the legislature when it tried to protect the Charles River from the destructive “planners” of the Metropolitan District Commission.  When the legislature destroyed the MDC, the legislature split the responsibility for the Charles River between the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.

The MDC “planners” hated by so many state legislators wound up in the DCR with their vile plans, and the Cambridge City Council is a very destructive bedfellow.   MassDOT has been the adult in a room standing up to the destructive Cambridge City Council and the DCR.

A responsible Cambridge City Council would implement the legislature’s sound intentions when it destroyed the MDC.  A responsible Cambridge City Council would tell the legislature to finish the job it started when it wiped out the MDC.  The Cambridge City Council should be telling the legislature to getting rid of the DCR on the Charles River and give its powers there to MassDOT.

3. The Latest Outrage.

Here is a photo from several years ago of the excellent woods whose destruction nine city councilors support.  The woods is excellent, but it is NOT GOLD PLATED.

It is thick.  There are so many trees that there is no room for “mature trees.”  The Cambridge City Council has taken the position that this situation makes it commendable to destroy every one of them.  DCR plans, as presented below, would destroy all those trees but one.

The white figures in front of the doomed woods of the Wild Area are the 38 year resident and tourist loved Charles River White Geese.  They, in addition to this SECRET motion, are being directly  attacked by two SECRET Cambridge City Council motions with funding for outrages targeted at them along the Magazine Beach playing fields shoreline.  The older funding has achieved that vile goal.  The more recent funding has started destroying trees there.

All three votes have been worded to keep the vileness of the actions secret from the voters.

An accelerating series of outrages have reduced the habitat of the Charles River White Geese on the Charles River from a mile long stretch centered on the Boston University Bridge to pretty much just their Destroyed Nesting Area.

Looking carefully, Memorial Drive can be seen in this picture above the railroad tracks and between the woods.  The trees on the left are in the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.  The thick woods to the right is the wild area whose destruction (minus one tree) the Cambridge City Council has just supported.  The building in this picture is the Boston University Boathouse.

This excellent tree in the Goose Meadow, is called for destruction by the plans for the January 2016 outrage, which are now to be implemented WITH THE BLESSING OF THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL.  Until destroyed by the DCR and the Cambridge City Council, it dominates the view from the BU Bridge.

Naturally the destruction of this excellent tree will simply be “not noticed,” by members of the Cambridge City Council.  They also will “not notice”the destruction of this last habitat of free animals on the Charles River. Habitat destruction throughout would be accomplished by trucks carrying away the soil and trees of the Wild Area.  Habitat will be destroyed by the Cambridge City Council’s beloved gold plated pathways.  These plans are reproduced below.

EXACTLY ZERO PROTECTIONS are supported by nine City Councillors against further destruction of this last wild habitat on the Charles River.

Those gold plated highways which will go through this area will further destroy a wild area which was pristine before the Cambridge City Council, DCR / MDC and their friends started all the destruction.

4. Part of the Record of Cambridge City Council Outrages.

The situation is not that much different from the Cambridge City Council’s destruction of 3.4 acres in the Alewife reservation in the far west of Cambridge.  The Silver Maple Forest in Alewife subjected to the destruction has been called “irreplaceable” by the Cambridge City Council.

Their yelling was directed AT PRIVATE DEVELOPERS in the Silver Maple Forest who had the nerve to OBEY MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED ZONING.

Another highly visible AND COMPARABLE outrage was the destruction BY THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL of the thick woods on the Cambridge Common nearest Harvard Square.

The pattern is clear and does not stop.

And nine City Councilors will be oh, so shocked or, more likely, simply “not notice” while proclaiming their environmental sainthood.  The voters listen to the lies.  The contractors listen to the gold plated contracts.

5. The Plans.

Here are two stills from our video on the outrage of January 2016 based on those DCR / Cambridge plans.

Nine city councilors have just supported destruction here. 

I presume the presiding officer continues to proclaim looking at the documentation to be “lies.”

The first still is of the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

The areas now being destroyed by the DCR and by the Cambridge City Council are the last portion of the 38 year long habitat of the Charles River White Geese which has not yet been destroyed, although very real damage has been inflicted even on this formerly lush area.

The video from which these stills were taken may be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

Here are the January 2016 outrage’s plans for destruction in the Destroyed Nesting Area and the Wild Area.

Note that tree 535 in the DCR plans is the only tree in the Wild Area whose destruction is not proposed.  The tree whose photo is presented with the photo of the Wild area and shown above is pointed out in this slide.

Then again, the outrage which the Cambridge City Council, the DCR and their friends are creating at Magazine Beach has been presented to them from the records of the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  These were filed along with photos of the excellence which they are destroying.  This presentation was publicly called “lies” by their presiding officer.  Those OFFICIALLY FILED CITY COUNCIL PRESIDING OFFICER PROCLAIMED “LIES” are posted at http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html.

These plans call for destruction of 54 trees.  That number has been increased to more than 159 and who knows how much larger the destruction will get.

But then, plans and a record of massive destruction, and contradiction of lovely language by the representative of the lobby fighting for destruction is not only “irrelevant,” but the word “lie” has been used to describe comments based on published plans.

Here are the relevant slides presented by the DCR as part of a public presentation of its latest plans concerning the project praised and supported by the Cambridge City Council.  These plans are taken from the state website.

No environmental destruction is mentioned even though the “public meeting” is supposed to allow meaningful input.

The area corresponding to the above plans is to the right.

The Wild Area is at the extreme right.  The wider portion between there and the BU Bridge (projecting at the bottom) is the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

But then, as near as I can gather, the City Council’s presiding officer considers it a lie to base analyses on the public positions of destroyers.

How dare anybody hold government “planners” to their public positions!!!!!

Once again, even thought the destruction is kept secret, the DCR will lie that they have publicized their destruction, and claim these pablum filled presentations justify massive environmental destruction.

6. Some of the Victims.

And here are the tourist and resident beloved 38 year resident Charles River White Geese.

As is the norm in this fraudulent world, environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse are kept secret.

Heartless animal abuse is allowed as convenient by self proclaimed environmental saints of the Cambridge City Council.  The most visible victims, but most definitely not the only victims, are the Charles River White Geese.

A lying picture, according to the Presiding Officer of the Cambridge City Council.  I personally think the lie is coming from the Presiding Officer in his fight for these terrible things combined with denials of reality.

Hungry turkeys wandering through a residential neighborhood near Central Square in one of the most densely developed cities in the United States.

7. Subway Maneuverings.  Another bizarre project which has lost, but which is part of the latest outrage, anyway..

A key driving force behind the Wild Area destruction is the Cambridge “planner” supported BU Bridge Crossing route in the Urban Ring subway planning.  The “planners,” by doing the destruction now, are freeing themselves from justifying the destruction in a formal environmental review.  Destruction now frees them from justifying it as part of a certain to lose scheme they hope to get later.

The Cambridge “planners” and their friends have publicly claimed that their BU Bridge Crossing route is the only Urban Ring subway crossing under consideration.

This Cambridge “planner” position is proven total  nonsense by the responsible Kenmore Crossing route alternative in the Urban Ring.

The Kenmore Crossing route is not only under consideration, it looks like the probable winner of the two options.

The near certain coming victory of the Kenmore Crossing route over the Cambridge “planner” supported BU Bridge Crossing route was made pretty much certain by the reconstruction of the Yawkey Station (photo below) on the Commuter Rail in place.  The Cambridge “planners” are apparently still fighting for the BU Bridge Crossing’s demand to move Yawkey Station about half a mile to the north to  a block from Boston University’s Marsh Chapel.

This is Yawkey Station after being rebuilt by the legislature.

Part of this certainly dead Cambridge “planner” pushed proposal requires the destruction of the Wild Area.

The City Manager / “planners” support for the BU Bridge Crossing route outrage was reaffirmed in the Rossi letter to the state concerning the expansion of South Station.  That letter, of course, only mentioned the Urban Ring. The letter was not so silly as to specify the nonsensical position of Cambridge “planners” in their support for the silly AND DESTRUCTIVE BU Bridge Crossing alternative.

The silence of the City Manager letter on this nonsensical alternative says exactly how credible the position is.

I have been working on the Urban Ring since 1985.  The Kenmore Crossing route has been supported by the transit people as an alternative since 1991.  I proposed it in 1986.

Yawkey Station, under the Kenmore Crossing route will, along with the Urban Ring subway and three Green Line routes, create a major transportation hub at Kenmore Square.  The Kenmore Crossing route would directly connect to downtown Boston without changing seats because it constitutes an Orange Line spur coming out of Ruggles Station coming to / from the Orange Line.

The BU Bridge Crossing route is a patchwork mess.  The BU Bridge Crossing route features Green Line technology directly connecting to nothing at its ends.

In the early 2000's. I participated in a presentation at the Red Sox’ Fenway Park of the major project which is now going in across the street from Fenway Park.  It would feature major connections to Yawkey Station.

At that presentation, I individually spoke with the lead developer.  I gave him his first knowledge that Cambridge wants to move Yawkey Station.  And that Cambridge could care less about the harm to his project.

Not long after our discussion (as these things go), the legislature funded the rebuilding of Yawkey Station in place, an expenditure which would be trashed if Cambridge succeeded in moving Yawkey Station by a BU Bridge Crossing route.

But Cambridge and the Cambridge City Council are still involved in their destructive pipe dreams with the same old heartless abuse of beautiful valuable animals who are obvious tourist attractions..

8. MassDOT is standing up to the Cambridge “Planners” and Friends.

I will not go into, yet again, the machinations being secretly attempted by Cambridge “planners” and friends as part of the I90 rebuild across the Charles River from Magazine Beach.

So far MassDOT, with my support, has stood up to yet more destructive dirty tricks.

One of the two key improvements in the I90 rebuild planning, however, was my idea.

9. Green Line A.

This concept is provided yet again, on general principles, based on fifty years of experience.  It would provide transportation needed for the new area created in Allston (a relocated Harvard Medical School among other things), and would provide transportation badly needed by the North Allston residential neighborhood.

Most importantly to Cambridge, it would free up significant space on Red Line trains between Park Street and Harvard by giving Back Bay traffic an alternate route between Back Bay and Harvard Station, through the I90 rebuild area.  It would also give Harvard Square business better transportation for their customers.

The other change than mine of the two major changes already made in I90 rebuild planning makes this very major possible improvement even more viable.