Thursday, February 22, 2007

The Charles River White Ducks find a new lair

Bob La Trémouille reports:

I have frequently reported on the status of the Charles River White Ducks, Andrake and Daffney.

They were abandoned at Magazine Beach last summer on the day before our memorial for Bumpy the leader of the gaggle, on the fifth anniversary of his very political killing. During the celebration a sick alleged human being loosed his dog on them. I saved the two. I used the dog as a football when he had his teeth on Andrake's neck.

Bill Naumann taught them what the Charles River was for. He backed into the Charles River while feeding them. They followed him and were overjoyed by their discovery of the Charles River. They established a lair under vegetation on the south side which has since been destroyed by sickos from the Charles River Conservancy.

I was very pleased today to get the impression that they have a new lair. It looks very safe and could be a good place for baby ducks to hatch.


Caveat: I have been putting out reports on the Charles River since March 2000 when the Charles River White Geese returned to the Destroyed Nesting Area to learn that sickos from Boston University had destroyed in on behalf of the DCR/MDC.

My reports since then, combining email newsletters and this blog, have easily exceeded 700.

One thing I have always done is realize that there are truly reprehensible people in this world: Boston University, the state bureaucrats, the Cambridge City Council, and loads of people who are either pulling their strings or having their strings pulled.

Given this truly belligerent, but very destructive, minority, I have been extremely careful about divulging information which could lead to harm to the animals of the Charles River if the wrong sicko got that information.

I am not going to say any more about the new location of the lair of the Charles River White Ducks.

Thank you.

Cambridge Chronicle - Odd Environmental Actions

Bob La Trémouille reports:

1. Recent Environmental Destruction.
2. This week's Cambridge Chronicle.
A. Silver Maple Forest.
B. Fake Environmental Group.
3. Proposed letter to the Editor, Silver Maple, Fake Environmental Group in Context.
4. Existing Record of the City of Cambridge and its "Groups."
5. The Bad Guys respond.
6. Cambridge Chronicle prints letter.

1. Recent Environmental Destruction.

A couple of weeks ago we reported about strikingly irresponsible tree destruction coming in the City of Cambridge.

The Cambridge Chronicle promptly dispatched a photographer who took some excellent photos of Kathy Podgers, her companion dog and me under eight excellent and threatened trees. Their reporter interviewed me on Friday, Monday (the photo session) and Tuesday.

But nothing appeared in that Thursday's issue and what appeared in today's issue is exactly the opposite.

2. This week's Cambridge Chronicle.

A. Silver Maple Forest.

They printed a letter concerning the planned private destruction of the silver forest in Belmont / Cambridge near Alewife and Cambridge Highlands. Excellent letter. Writer with strikingly problematic record.

B. Fake Environmental Group.

They devoted an entire section front page to a new, fake green group.

The group claims to be pro-environment, but could give a damn less about the massive environmental destruction ongoing by their friends, the City of Cambridge. But they love fancy light bulbs.

Interestingly, they look like friends of incumbent Cambridge City Councilors. Standard position of the Cambridge City Council: "How dare you look at our massive environmental destruction. Look at our fancy light bulbs."

3. Proposed letter to the Editor, Silver Maple, Fake Environmental Group in Context.

I just submitted the following proposed letter to the editor, some edits added:


I appreciated the letter about the impact of proposed construction on Route 2 on Cambridge Highlands. That is a very major concern, but it must be placed in context.

The context is that the greatest environmental threat is irresponsible environmental behavior by the City of Cambridge and its friends in the state bureaucracy.

Cambridge Highlands is across the street from the Fresh Pond Reservation. Cambridge is in the process of destroying thousands of trees at the Fresh Pond Reservation. The reason is that Cambridge wants to put in saplings so that Cambridge can brag about all the saplings that Cambridge has installed without mentioning the healthy, mature trees destroyed to put in saplings.

At Alewife, next to the private project on Route 2, Cambridge plans massive environmental destruction of near virgin woodlands to put in a drainage tank which should be installed under a parking lot about 500 feet to the south.

Hundreds of trees are being destroyed on the Charles River along with all wetlands and all animal habitat.

Pretty much every city project starts with the destruction of trees, almost all the destruction not only unnecessary but silly. Street trees and trees in new construction are constantly destroyed, even the largest.

The city's response to objections about their environmental destuction? The city's friends create "green" groups which could care less about massive government destruction of the green, but the "green" groups love their fancy light bulbs. But they sound so good while their friends at the city and state aggressively destroy Cambridge's green heritage.

4. Existing Record of the City of Cambridge and its "Groups."

Cambridge is a very active community.

The City of Cambridge started creating grass roots groups back in the 70's. They would talk with their friends and their friends would create the groups.

It was not at all surprising that the friends would work to make these groups as fake as possible, that is work to make the supposed grass roots organizations work to accomplish the dirty tricks that the City of Cambridge is trying to do.

There are all sorts of lovely techniques to make a group look real and to have it be REALLY FAKE. But the fake groups can be used to achieve their supposed purposes because, usually, there are more real people in the group than there are fakes, but you are fighting against major, very real institutional obstacles.

Thus groups which give the impression of being created to control the government in reality act to control the activists.

In the middle of this reprehensible situation are fake environmental groups.

I have no problems if friend of the Cambridge City Council want to run around fighting for fancy light bulbs. I just expect their groups to be honestly named.

"The Group Fighting for Fancy Light Bulbs" sounds like an excellent name.

"Greenport" strikes me as a name which is a flat out lie for a group which is managed to prevent defense of the Green when the friends of the organizers (city councilors) are aggressively destroying the Green in Cambridge.

And there is no way the organizers of these fake green organizations will name their groups in an honest manner.

But this is business as usual in Cambridge.

Reprehensible, for all practical purposes fraudulent, but business as usual.

5. The Bad Guys respond.

I have discussed the above analysis of this alleged Green organization with one of its founders.

Her response was to give them a few years and see how they look. That, to me, sounded like just another con in a city very consistent for its con jobs.

I passed on to the Cambridgeport list an announcement from an incipient Green organization in Allston in which the incipient Green organization was talking about all sorts of Green things.

But this Cambridge "Green" organization is talking about fancy light bulbs and is very visibly being organized by people who don’t want to hear about REAL Green issues in Cambridge.

And their friends on the Cambridge City Council have consistently used this fraud on the voters of claiming environmental sainthood, but the only sainthood they have is fancy lightbulbs.

Do I think it is just an extension of the environmental fraud on the Cambridge City Council? Of course, I do.

And they would not even dream of using an honest name for their fancy light bulb group.

6. Cambridge Chronicle prints letter.

My original draft of the letter in section 3 was printed by the Cambridge Chronicle in its March 1, 2006, edition, at page 10. The title they gave was "Trees are more important than light bulbs." The letter printed, being the original draft, has differences from what I have given you above, but does not differ at the bottom line.

The Cambridge Chronicle printed the letter close to an op-ed piece by another of Cambridge's "Green" groups which could care less about Cambridge's and the state bureaucrats' ongoing destruction of Cambridge's green heritage.

The "Green" group's piece said pretty much nothing, as usual. They did not even mention their fancy light bulbs.