Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Goose Down Clubbers

1. Introduction.
2. Archie Mazmanian on attacks on animals.
3. Analysis.

1. Introduction.

On the Charles River White Geese facebook page we have a go round with a woman who has a problem with anti-goose behavior by her Home Owners Association, and we have been sharing ways to resolve the problem.

This site is not really appropriate for that situation, but Archie Mazmanian’s comment certainly is.

My comment from the Charles River White Geese facebook page follows, transmitting for him.

2. Archie Mazmanian on attacks on animals.

Archie Mazmanian responds to Lauren’s comment with the following, sent by him awhile back and also applicable to her situation.



MA and Cambridge government officials expressed their horror that the Charles River White Geese were being clubbed by hunters for their goose-down feathers, currently in great demand for pillows, apparel and other comforting uses. “Horrible!” “Deplorable!” “Despicable!” vented these officials. “These barbarous hunters must be stopped!” “This cruelty must stop!”

No, the preceding did not happen. Yet the conduct of MA and Cambridge officials is accomplishing the demise of the Charles River White Geese by means less transparent than clubbing. The goal of these officials is not goose-down but putting the geese down by more subtle means than clubbing because they just don’t want the Charles River White Geese there below the northerly side of the BU Bridge. The Goose Ghetto will apparently be continued to be squeezed until this goal is achieved. While the Charles River White Geese survive, they do not thrive.

So perhaps we should picture these MA and Cambridge government officials yielding clubs. What’s the difference?

3. Analysis.

If you go through the fine print and secret definitions, Cambridge and MA quite simply have contempt for animals.

They are killing off all resident animals on the Charles River basin.

But they do do a lot of creative lying to give decent humans the exact opposite impression.

Charles River Memories, Part VIII

1. Archie’s Report.
2. Analysis.
3. Prior reports.

1. Archie’s Report.


By Archie Mazmanian

While the bridges of the Charles River have not been cinematically extolled with a love story of the likes of “The Bridges of Madison County” starring Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep, they received cinematic notoriety in connection with the Great Brinks Robbery of 1950 in the North End of Boston, just a hop, skip and a jump from the portion of the river eastward of the Charles River dam (when there was only one dam). This daring robbery was followed in 1955 by the movie “Six Bridges to Cross,” a fictional version of the robbery, starring Tony Curtis. The title reflected the possible escape routes that might be taken by the many robbers that the law enforcement authorities had to consider, to wit the many bridges over the Charles.

I don’t recall “Six Bridges to Cross” as encouraging interest in the Charles River. The movie might have been considered comedic by moviegoers outside of the Boston area. The impact of the Brink’s Robbery was not a plus for Boston and environs, especially when followed by more flicks of the robbery. The 1950s were not a happy time in the Boston area, including urban renewal projects, in particular the demolition of the West End for high rise development providing magnificent views of the Charles.

The Internet includes a “List of crossings of the Charles River” with dates, locations, and other interesting information, such that details need not be provided here, identifying crossings from “its mouth at Boston Harbor upstream to its source at Echo Lake.” But mention has to be made of the Zakim-Bunker Hill Bridge built in 2003, that magnificent edifice at the northerly end of the “BIG DIG.” An earlier version of the Charles River crossing was pejoratively referred to as “Scheme Z” that would have been disastrous. (I have referred to the Zakim-Bunker Hill Bridge in my posts at this Blog on Phrase 2 of the Urban Ring Project in considering the proposed Charles River crossing for the latter Project over or under the BU Bridge as its “cockamamie” Scheme Zs.)

Many of the other bridges over the Charles accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, who can stop and admire the vistas upstream and downstream. But this does not detract from the beauty of the Zakim-Bunker Hill Bridge that itself can be admired from a distance. Alas, the portion of the Charles River it crosses is overwhelmed.

Over the years we have taken the bridges that cross the Charles River for granted. Now, in times of economic downturn, we have learned that theses bridges, like we mere mortals, age and require infrastructure maintenance. This has been going on for years with the BU Bridge until it was necessary to attend to maintenance and restructuring, much belatedly. We have been inconvenienced for well over a year by this work and it may take yet another year for it to be completed. [Note: Let us not forget the devastating impact upon the Charles River White Geese being “West-Ended” at their habitat at the northerly end of the BU Bridge.] Meantime, we know that similar issues will require similar work for the Mass. Avenue Bridge and the Salt and Pepper Bridge. So it may take close to a decade for these major Charles River bridges to be rehabbed.

We have been and will continue to be inconvenienced for some time to come in crossing the Charles River, considered so routine in the past. But the Charles River is not to blame. Perhaps the lesson is to show more respect for the Charles River and its bridges and what they offer not only to the communities the Charles passes through but to all of us along its meandering route in uniting our communities.

There are many beautiful stone bridges upstream of the BU Bridge that will also need maintenance. All of this bridge work will be expensive and painful. Recall this chorus from a Patti Page hit (in a different context) of the 1950s:

Cross over the bridge,
Cross over the bridge,
Change your reckless way of livin’
Cross over the bridge ….

Ignoring these bridges over the years was indeed reckless.

2. Analysis.

Ignoring the bridges certainly was bad.

Using the bridges as an excuse for environmental destruction which can be avoided is “reprehensible” (to quote a civil rights judge talking about the City of Cambridge).

As usual, the contrast between decent human beings and victims of the Cambridge Pol organization is dramatic.

“You gotta be positive. No matter how much we destroy you and what you love, you gotta be positive. No matter how much we do exactly the opposite of what we and you promised, you gotta be positive.”

A really rotten city government with a really rotten, massive machine keeping it and its destructiveness in power through Big Sister demagoguery.

This is the ultimate lie.

3. Prior reports.

Part VII, 4/16/11:

Part VI,4/11/11:

Intermission, 4/1/11:

Part V, 3/29/11:

Part IV, 3/7/11:

Part III, 2/19/11:

Part II, 2/5/11:

Part I, 1/29/11: