The following letter was sent of behalf of Friends of the White Geese and received by the Cambridge, MA, City Council on January 5, 2019. It was received by the Cambridge City Manager about a week earlier.
It is based on but is a significant modification of our analysis in our last post on this Blog.
1. Boat Dock Update.
2. An outrageous record.
3. Specific Techniques.
4. A few other relevant points: TIME’s Person of the Year, Crazy Rich Asians.
5. Summary
Gentlemen / Ladies:
1. Boat Dock Update.
First of all, here are the plans which Phil Barber found on the Internet and which the Cambridge City Council did not want to know when it funded this project.
[* * * *
editorial addition. This is the totality of the plans they voted on:
* * * * ]
Phil Barber has gotten quite a few photographs of the current situation.
I have added to that photos of the outrages of which the current situation can only be properly evaluated in context..
The full report has to be viewed on the Charles River White Geese blog [ed: previous post] at https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/charles-river-beach-boat-dock-update.html for full understanding, with a lot more photos on the boat dock, now and before, plus on other / related techniques in heartless animal abuse by the Department of Conservation and Recreation and Cambridge.
The most important part is the level to which the DCR and Cambridge are ramping up the heartless animal abuse. The goal as stated in the sanctified (and violated as convenient) Charles River Master Plan is:
TO KILL OFF OR DRIVE AWAY ALL RESIDENT ANIMALS.
That goal has been crucial to the treatment of the relationship between the Charles River and its shore. Included below is a plaque by which the Cambridge City Council’s “kind of activist” and friends publicly bragged of heartless animal abuse in a propaganda show on city property.
The Charles River White Geese are dominant in the planning because they are the most visible of the free animals which are considered such a threat by government. They are by no means the only victims; note the wild turkeys walking the streets of Cambridge.
On this and following page [below] are four Phil photos. An additional five are on the blog.
Here is Phil Barber’s analysis of the rocks which have been created as a possible barrier, as seen in his photos at the water, and my analysis of the continued food blockade.:
* * * *
The new gravel bed kayak launch goes right down into the water. It is very large gravel which might be hard on water birds' feet, can't say for sure.
The access is clear down that weird bridge right to the water, plus those odd little triangular extensions, presumably some sort of design enhancements as they don't seem to have a practical use. I would assume the barriers were put there to keep people from backing their cars onto the bridge when launching boats and collapsing it. There are new barriers in place, or they may be the original ones.
* * * *
Phil also has seen a vehicle which apparently was driven on the bridge, with aesthetic damage.
As Phil says, we cannot be certain whether the new infill blocks FURTHER the Charles River White Geese from their food of most of the last 38 years.
My analysis, just of the destroyed boat launch.
* * * *
Of major interest, as well, is that the narrow “bridge” still exists for access from the water to the shore. It is highly unlikely that the Charles River White Geese would dare go through that narrow throat to their food and home of most of the last 38 years, even if the big stones do not prevent their exit from the Charles River. They get on the land side and they would be at the mercy of predators having to return through that narrow opening.
Deliberate starvation has been the tactic. Those stones are large enough to be of concern. Looking at the slope of the ramp, it looks to me as if it could be too steep for them. And the narrow bridge continues as a throat between silly triangles, enough to prevent feeding at the home of the Charles River White Geese for most of the past 38 years.
The outrages of the 2000's rendered useless the vibrant boat dock of the 2000's by blocking the established boat dock from access.
That blocking bridge still exists in spite of the pretty affectations. It could be too weak to carry vehicles. It clearly is too narrow for such a use. It is clearly blocked by vertical barriers, called bollards in the plans.
* * *
2. An outrageous record.
Here is the city council’s “kind of activist” and her friends bragging in a propaganda show in a city building of heartless animal abuse by the DCR and Cambridge.
Here are the Charles River White Geese begging for food of most of the last 38 years at the Magazine Beach Playing Fields THE DAY THAT CAMBRIDGE AND THE DCR TOOK IT AWAY FROM THEM.
And here is a now common view on the streets of Cambridge, one of the most densely populated cities in the United States, starving wild turkeys whose habitat has been heartless destroyed by Cambridge and the DCR.
3. Specific Techniques.
I realize that the Presiding Officer of the Cambridge City Council is rather offended that we use government plans to understand government activities. He seems to consider that use is some form of lying. Definitely unfair, it would appear, from his point of view.
From the point of view of responsible people, we are dealing with governmental entities with
(1) Destructive records;
(2) A very strong tendency to brag when they have something to brag about
(3) A very strong tendency to keep maximum secrecy when they have something to be ashamed of. Secrecy is very clearly the name of the game RIGHT NOW.
The plans are on record. At minimum, they constitute the maximum destruction publicized by highly irresponsible entities. It would thus be highly stupid to ignore what these destructive entities have placed on record in favor of meaningless platitudes from the same entities / their controlled supporters WHILE MAINTAINING MAXIMUM SECRECY. We are not stupid.
Here are the Magazine Beach Playing Fields as presented in part of a photo by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation published earlier this year. It was concerning work under consideration on I-90 (the Mass. Pike), on the Boston / southern side of the Charles River, across from Magazine Beach:
The massive trees viewed in this photo include very major destruction planned in the plans which include the boat dock. The tiny brown opening next to the Charles River at the bottom right is the location of the boat dock.
Our analysis of June 6, 2017, to the Cambridge City Council, of these plans as given a blank check in Order 1 of the April 24, 2017 meeting may be read at http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html.
Here is a photo of the same wall of introduced vegetation from the Boston side taken several years ago:
This thick wall of introduced vegetation was sold to the public as a “lawn to the river.” The lie was so major that one of the fake protective groups celebrated it with a “swim in” in the Charles River next to the banks which were replaced with this outrageous wall.
This is a view from the Boston side a few years ago. The boat dock which continues to be rendered useless WITH BLATHERING NONSENSE THAT IS NOW A CANOE DOCK is at the right.
We have reported on the outrage of January 2016, with foreboding of the current outrages, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.
They Hyatt Regency Hotel is about a block east of the ghetto which is the last not totally destroyed part of the habitat of the 38 year resident Charles River White Geese. EVERY tree on the banks of the Charles River at the hotel was destroyed in the January 2016 outrage.
Ernie Sarno (whom we have never met) did an excellent video in 2009 of the Charles River White Geese feeding on that riverbank in “White Geese of Cambridge” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2-xSIYrB5o.
And here is what the DCR and Cambridge did to that riverbank as part of the January 2016 outrage:
These massive stones might as well be another Starvation Wall. Clearly they starve the Charles River White Geese.
Is there any meaningful difference from the large rocks installed at the destroyed boat dock?
Does a difference really matter with the narrow throat on the artificial bridge / obstruction?
Here are two photos taken from stills of a video at the boat dock of the 20th Century before
A shot of the still existing, but modified bridge. It was then behind the opening (and the child).
The photo is taken from the east. Phil’s photos of it from the same direction now, are above.
BUT THERE IS A WALL OF INTRODUCED BUSHES AS AN INNER BARRIER ADDED AS PART OF THE OUTRAGES OF THE 2000's.
The DCR and Cambridge filled in this artificially created pond. The Charles River White Geese loved it, and went through it to get to their food of most of the last 38 years.
Two reasons to destroy the pond and replace it with impenetrable vegetation.
(Note: there was a reorganization / destruction of a predecessor organization. We will not quibble. One name or another, it is the same destructive “planners.”)
4. A few other relevant points: TIME’s Person of the Year, Crazy Rich Asians.
A. Thanks to the Editors of Time Magazine.
On the cover of Time Magazine’s December 24 / December 31, 2018 issue, the Editors of Time identified as their Person of the Year: “the GUARDIANS and the WAR ON TRUTH.”
In association with listing specific honorees on page 45, Daniel Felsenthal state:
* * * * *
They are representatives of a broader fight by countless others around the world . . . who risk all to tell the story of our time.
* * * *
B. Crazy Rich Asians.
In real life, I am a Union movie actor.
At this time of the year, I am regularly swamped with viewing major motion pictures to evaluate them for my vote on the SAG Awards.
The opening sequence of “Crazy Rich Asians” is excellent and is exactly on point.
* * * SPOILER ALERT * * *
Twenty years ago, in the middle of a drenching rain storm, an elegant Asian woman and her three well dressed young children enter the lobby of a fine hotel. They and three staff members are the only people we see in the lobby.
She asks for the keys to the suite she has reserved. She is informed by the desk clerk that they have no reservation for her and no vacancies. This is confirmed by the manager. She asks to use their phone to arrange accommodations. Cut to a phone booth in the middle of the drenching rain, with the hotel in the background. She is on the phone. We next see her in the lobby with her children and the staff.
The hotel elevator door opens. Out comes a distinguished looking elderly gentleman, the owner of the hotel. He informs the staff to show the Asian lady to the suite she had reserved. He also informs the staff that, while on the phone with her, they had done some business.
“As of Tuesday, her family will own this hotel.”
Cut to the faces of the three staff members.
* * * *
Not that long ago in Cambridge, there was a Court case in which three levels of the Court system roundly condemned the behavior of the then Cambridge City Manager over his outrageous firing, and destruction of the life of, a department head, Malvina Monteiro, a black Cape Verdean woman. The Court findings were that her life was destroyed because she was working for women’s rights in association with the terms of her employment.
,
The City Council named the police station for the roundly Court condemned City Manager.
The roundly Court condemned City Manager, in the ordinary course of business honorably retired.
In related action, one and perhaps two members of the Cambridge City Council were then unelected by the Cambridge voters.
At least with regard to the first, it was highly clear that he lost his job over the Monteiro outrage.
Now there is a very major matter of 56 mostly excellent trees being destroyed at Magazine Beach on the Charles River, and there are a number of City Councilors loudly claiming to be concerned about trees . . .
And the electorate is highly concerned about trees.
Close up?
5. Summary
As Phil says, we cannot be certain that the new infill blocks FURTHER the Charles River White Geese from their food of most of the last 38 years.
Of major interest, as well, is that the narrow “bridge” still exists for access from the water to the shore. It is highly unlikely that the Charles River White Geese would dare go through that narrow throat to their food and home of most of the last 38 years, even if the big stones to not prevent their exit from the Charles River. They get on the land side and they would be at the mercy of predators.
Deliberate starvation has been the tactic. Those stones are large enough to be of concern. Looking at the slope of the ramp, it looks to me as if it could be too steep for them.
The outrages of the 2000's rendered useless the vibrant boat dock of the 2000's by blocking the established boat dock from access.
That blocking bridge still exists in spite of the pretty affectations. It could be too weak to carry vehicles. It clearly is too narrow for such a use. It is clearly blocked by vertical barriers, called bollards in the plans.
The Blog [ed: the prior posting] version of this analysis is posted at:
https://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/charles-river-beach-boat-dock-update.html
Sincerely,
Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair
