RE: Beloved Bald Eagle in neighboring Arlington poisoned. Cambridge and the DCR not known to STOP poisoning Magazine Beach. Cambridge RESTRICTS advance knowledge of environmental actions in the BU Bridge area to the WOMAN WHO POISONED THE CHARLES AS AGENT FOR THE DCR.
1. Related outrage. Beloved bald eagle poisoned.
2. Related letter to destructive Cambridge City Council.
3. The Charles River Poisoner, beloved by Cambridge government.
4. Charles River Poisoner and friends designated as THE ONLY ENTITIES ALLOWED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS IN THE AREA.
5. Cambridge Conservation Commission meetings are secret NOW before the fact, except for the date, with SOME POSSIBLE INFORMATION AFTER THE FACT.
6. Caveat.
1. Related outrage. Beloved bald eagle poisoned.
Beloved bald eagle in next door Arlington killed by poisons.
The DCR (by its predecessor) and Cambridge started poisoning the banks of the Charles at about the same time they started deliberately starving the 42 year resident Charles River White Geese, 2008.
Here is a photo of the Charles River White Geese learning they were being starved by Cambridge. At the time the poisons were introduced.
The usual fraud was key. Cambridge and the DCR (including by its predecessor) brag of a supposedly holy Charles River Master Plan. Key in the Master Plan was a LAWN TO THE RIVER which was the usual fraud.
They starved the Charles River White Geese by introducing a bizarre wall at the river creating a situation where the Playing Fields might as well be ten miles inland. The important goal, however, attacking the beloved and now 43 year resident Charles River White Geese, was accomplished by the Starvation Wall. They kept the Charles River White Geese from the luscious grass on which they had fed and, if they got through the wall, by poisons such as those which killed that beloved Bald Eagle. Dead bees have been seen, obviously because of this outrage.
Here is a photo of the Starvation Wall from the early 2010's, taken from the Boston Side.
The tiny opening has had multiple AND INCREASING obstacles constructed which perfects the heartlessness of the abuse.
The situation is so bad that the DCR has refused to promise not to introduce poisons on the Boston side of the Charles River in a coming park project ALSO IN A PRISTINE AREA, associated with the rebuilding of I-90 (Massachusetts Turnpike).
2. Related letter to destructive Cambridge City Council.
The Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council received our latest letter on the ongoing outrages at its recent regular meeting which allowed public comment. It may be read at: https://cambridgema.iqm2.com/citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3797&Inline=True, Pages 266 to 290. I saw no action in the final actions of that meeting or in the agenda for February 6, 2023. I also see no change in the secrecy of activities on the Charles River in the habitat of the Charles River White Geese.
The letter includes documentation on the poisoning of the Magazine Beach playing fields and goes into further analysis of the accelerating outrages. It runs over 20 pages, too large to really handle here. I have PDF copies (three files, too large for one) and would be pleased to provide them. Please contact me for the PDF’s at boblat@yahoo.com.
It starts with a slide summary as follows:
3. The Charles River Poisoner, beloved by Cambridge government.
At the time the destructive duo started to starve the Charles River White Geese and to poison the Magazine Beach playing fields where they have lived and fed for most of the last 43 years, the two constructed expensive drainage to drain off the poisons.
Here is the created drainage in a still from “From Cambridge to Boston with the DJ Inspire 1 Drone footage,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN-OmMzvHhw, minute 10.26. Lining the Charles River is the Starvation Wall.
Here is a sign posted by the state bragging about the drainage needed to keep their poisons out of the Charles River. They do not mention the fact that the poisons were introduced by them and Cambridge.
Three photos by Phil Barber, combined by me.
A government contractor beloved by the Cambridge government, as a paid contractor for the DCR blocked the drainage using Trump / DCR funds and DCR provided “volunteers.”
Here is a photo of the blockage.
The blue area near the top of the photo is the Charles River.
The following May, an algae pool appeared at the top of the “native” black plastic, to the left (in the picture) of the blockage.
Here is Phil Barber’s photo.
The following September the filth had spread in the waters of the Charles River next to the blockage.
Here are TWO of a number of photos from Phil Barber of this outrage.
The following spring, the algae infestation had poisoned the Charles River below the Mass. Ave. Bridge, the next bridge east of the BU Bridge. A fake protective group close to the DCR started objecting.
Previous work by the DCR / Cambridge destroyed hundreds of mostly excellent trees in this area, with the support of that fake protective group. See my video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.
4. Charles River Poisoner and friends designated as THE ONLY ENTITIES ALLOWED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS IN THE AREA.
Advance PUBLIC REVIEWS of environmental projects are required.
Cambridge, through various maneuvers, has established that ONLY THE CHARLES RIVER POISONER AND FRIENDS ARE ALLOWED SUCH INFORMATION AND ESTABLISHED THAT ONLY THEY ARE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MANDATORY REVIEW.
An ongoing DCR work has been apparently modified to split off the BU Bridge area possible outrages,
A. the destruction of the Wild Area, and
B. the destruction of the Micro Center Grove, WHICH THE CHARLES RIVER POISONER AGREED TO YEARS AGO.
The Charles River Poisoner gave the City Council a map showing the destruction she had agreed to years before the Cambridge City Council funded her to provide “environmental” assistance in the area..
Here are the outrages:
The Micro Center Grove:
The Wild Area:
Photo is from the BU Bridge. The railroad is the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge.
To the left is the Destroyed Nesting Area, the ghetto to which the 43 year resident Charles River White Geese are heartlessly confined. The Destroyed Nesting Area was formerly lush with vegetation. Almost all of that vegetation has been heartlessly destroyed by the DCR and its friends.
The map provided by the Charles River Poisoner to the Cambridge City Council showing destruction supported by her showed the entire Magazine Beach Recreation Area. I have provided the entire map to the Cambridge City Council reproduced in three parts to make it readily understandable in letter format.
Here is the portion which includes the Micro Center grove blown up to focus on the Micro Center Grove.
The number 3 shows a parking lot where the Micro Center Grove currently stands. The facilities below it are the MDC bathhouse and swimming pool.
In 2017, a group of city councilors held a May Day celebration on City Hall’s front steps in which they lied of environmental sainthood. Their first motion of the night was to praise the DCR for its destructive plans on Magazine Beach and to offer financial support.
The DCR’s plans to destroy 56 mostly excellent trees at Magazine Beach had already been filed with the Cambridge Conservation Commission. I spent more than a month collecting photos of the outrage, and, by my letter of June 6, 2017 passed on to the Cambridge City Council my edits of the CCC filing along with corresponding photos. That letter is posted at http://www.friendsofthewhitegeese.org/agenda1.pdf. Actual implementation is exceeding what was filed and is over 60. The MDC filing and my letter include the destruction of the Micro Center Grove and a lot more outrages.
5. Cambridge Conservation Commission meetings are secret NOW before the fact, except for the date, with SOME POSSIBLE INFORMATION AFTER THE FACT.
My main source of information on actions in the BU Bridge area area affecting the Charles River and its banks has been the Cambridge Conservation Commission which reviews the plans.
I was deleted from the mailing list of meetings and stayed off that distribution in spite of written objection with signed receipt.
I have made multiple complaints of the censorship to the Cambridge City Council. The complaints have been ignored. Public meetings of entities would appear to be found on line through the web page of the City of Cambridge.
The Cambridge Conservation Commission NOW has a page on line. I found it in preparing this report. I found it on a Google search. That page was not available on any prior Google search. That is an “improvement” over the prior total secrecy.
The Cambridge Conservation Commission’s page NOW on line is at https://www.cambridgema.gov/Services/conservationcommission.
It has a link which provides only dates of meetings. So there is no choice in advance other than to physically attend every meeting to determine activities in advance.
The list also does not state the location of meetings.
The page NOW also has a link to videos. At last check, the only 2023 video was of January 23. The list says three meetings have occurred so far in 2023. A ZOOM link is provided, which works. The agenda shows at the beginning of the video. The agenda includes a link to register for a ZOOM.
There is no way to get the agenda in advance, and the ZOOM requires an access code which is in the agenda. Same maximum secrecy.
The video page list is NOW a page supposedly giving access to meeting minutes and videos.
Checking prior meetings, a meeting and video were listed for December 19, 2022. A pass code is required to see the ZOOM record. The passcode did not work. The minutes can be accessed through clicking on the date.
December 5, 2022. The ZOOM link and pass code do work.
When I have time, I will go back to see what I can find of the previously secret meetings.
So, it looks like, UNLESS A PARTICIPANT HAS INVITED “PUBLIC” participants, meetings are not open to the public, but NOW MAY BE FINDABLE AFTER THE FACT..
6. Caveat.
This report has been rewritten so extensively that I am gun shy.
Part of the situation is that I have tried to keep out of Cambridge political issues except for key environmental issues in areas where I see a chance for improvement. Organizational changes may have improved things.
Another part is that, over the years I have repeatedly griped about the same things. It is entirely possible that these gripes have taken hold. Another possible factor which comes into play is the SECRECY and duplicity which have been normal. I can only read so many minds. In particular, the letter I mention above and for which I reproduce the first page may have been important in the changes. The lead page summarizes the key issues in a simple slide. That simple slide could have communicated what pages of analysis did not get through.
Another matter of interest is that the bad apples scratch each other’s backs. The woman who led the key outrage in Harvard Square showed up to yell on the side of destroying the BU Bridge area. The Charles River Poisoner has started yelling in favor of a silly follow up zoning change initiated by the Harvard Square destroyer. That gives the APPEARANCE of “improvement” while actually changing none of the very terrible outrages done by the City Council on her prior Harvard Square upzoning .
The trouble in preparation of this report is that things have been changing during my writing of this report. The changes ARE NOT SUBSTANTIVE. But the SECRECY and duplicity have been aided by the structural situation. The Cambridge City Council hides behind this secrecy and duplicity.
That said, I am doing the best I can do.
