Charles River White Geese:  Grandma, babies and a reprehensible government agency.

1. Reprehensible Government Agency.
2. Grandma, babies and the crushed stone.
3. Links to latest reports of outrages.
4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
5. Tip.


Here are a few photos from today, June 16, 2014.

1. Reprehensible Government Agency.

The irresponsible crushed rock dominates the core part of the nesting area.

This stuff was “properly” dumped as part of two highways supposedly making up for work related to the BU Bridge repairs.

When the irresponsible railroad workers used the most sensitive area for parking, they dumped more crushed stone because the area had been denuded by the Charles River “Conservancy” and by prior irresponsible workers.  And the workers were too lazy to walk a few hundred feet from the area under the Memorial Drive overpass.

When they left, “somebody” came back and dumped another load.

In the middle of this outrage, the Executive Director of the Cambridge Conservation Commission condemned the irresponsible parking and the most destructive manager told them to get out of the tiny area protected by the Cambridge Conservation Commission but encouraged the irresponsible parking outside the tiny protected area.

The destructive manager goes back and forth between lying about being a decent human being and bragging about how irresponsible his agency is.  Their goal is to kill off or drive away as many resident animals as they can get away with.  So he lies “no intent to harm” and brags about starving them.

2. Grandma, babies and the crushed stone.

In my last goose photos, I pointed out a gander with vestigial Brown China markings and commented that there was another with similar vestigial markings, but I thought she might be dead.

Brown Beauty lives!!!

I have the same problem, thankfully, with Brown Beauty as I do with the Charles River White Ducks.  I do not see her a few times and I think she is dead.

She is alive and in the nesting area.

I will not do a photo by photo analysis, but here are photos from today.

There are a couple of photos of a single baby who is changing colors from yellow to white.  He is approaching adolescence.

A number of other photos follow the pair I have been keeping an eye on.  Those photos also include a brown goose.  That is Brown Beauty.  She is now elderly, but she is now with us.  18 years old.

You may notice among other members of the gaggle, various geese who have black markings mixed in with their whiteness.  These would be grandchildren of Brown Beauty or offspring of the Toulouse Goose who was dropped in the area in 2000.  My memory is that the black markings, at least for Brown Beauty’s progeny, show up in the second generation.  Black Markings also appear in the progeny of the Toulouse, but I do not recall if her first generation babies were like that.  Brown Beauty’s babies have small black markings at most.  It is some of Brown Beauty’s second generation offspring who have the significant black markings.

The vestigial Brown China male is from a different family in the gaggle.

This last photo is a good breakout of the baby pair, their parents, and Brown Beauty.  The two babies are center front close together.  One is half in the shadow.  Behind them and to the right are their parents.  Behind them and to the left is Brown Beauty.

In the preceding two photos, the family gets further and further away from the camera.  The two photos before that are of the baby nearing adolescence.

And this last photo is an excellent demonstration of the rottenness of the "people" with whom we are dealing. In the rear is the eastern of the two formally created pathways.  You can see where the path ends.  The rest of the crushed stone is pure rottenness.

All a gift of a Sierra Club branch which praises environmental destroyers.


3. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are in my letter to the Cambridge City Council posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/h4009-destruction-of-hundreds-of-trees.html

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

a. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
b. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

My objection to the Cambridge City Council on the Grand Junction highway proposal is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/cambridge-ma-usa-destructive-grand.html.

4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.

I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

5. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

One of the major purposes of the fake company union groups is to perpetuate this lie.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.

Charles River Update: Cambridge, MA, USA City Council, MassDOT, Sierra Club

1. Cambridge City Council.
2. Massachusetts Department of Transportation.
a. Harvard’s Created Housing Area - The location of the meeting.
b. Meeting report.
3. Boston Sierra Club.


1. Cambridge City Council.

A few weeks ago, I filed photos of excellent trees on the Cambridge Common slated for destruction, many because they block the view.

All five continuing Cambridge City Councilors voted to destroy.  All four new Cambridge City Councilors seemed “neutral.”

I have kept an eye of the City Clerk’s report on the City Council meetings and agendas since then.

I have seen no signs of environmental decency from any of them on this outrage.

And remember (see point 3) the Boston Sierra Club has repeatedly endorsed incumbents / candidates for Cambridge City Council.

The key to the endorsements, however, is the very visible presence in the Boston Sierra Club was unapologetic members of the reprehensible Cambridge Machine.

2. Massachusetts Department of Transportation.

Last Wednesday, MassDOT conducted the third meeting of its advisory committee on the major work proposed for Interstate 90 (Mass. Pike) near the Charles River.

a. Harvard’s Created Housing Area - The location of the meeting.

The address of the meeting was new to me.

It turned out to be the former location of the larger portion of the neighborhood Shopping Center on Western Avenue in Allston.  This is the shopping center Harvard destroyed by refusing to rent the stores in what is now the former location.

The tactic was blatant hostage taking targeted at the Charlesview affordable housing at Western Avenue and North Harvard Street which Harvard wanted to turn into part of its empire.

Harvard succeeded in the hostage taking and the owners of Charlesview “voluntarily” agreed to sell Charlesview and to move the facility to the location of the former stores.

I drove past the mostly abandoned Charlesview housing on the way to the meeting.  It was very depressing.

I lived almost in view of the project when it was constructed.

The meeting was in the middle of the replacement housing area, the destroyed shopping center, in a large meeting room.

I have driven past the facility many times but have never had an opportunity to use it.

The worst thing I can say about this created neighborhood is that it gives the impression of being distressingly successful except it seems to be short of parking, and it is easily twice the density of Charlesview.  The comparison is between

(1) a 70's brutalistic project surrounded by parking and not overly dense, and
(2) Boston’s Beacon Hill or Boston’s South End newly created, although perhaps denser than the South End.

It looks great, but it is dense.

And it overwhelms its area.

b. Meeting report.

The presentation team gave its first package ideas for rebuilding the Mass. Pike viaduct.

This rearrangement seems to be the key behind perhaps all the destruction on the Charles River itself and on the Cambridge side.  Since we are dealing with secretive, dishonest people, it is impossible to fully state the situation.

Dealing with MassDOT is strikingly different from dealing with the rotters with whom I am constantly exposed in Cambridge and its state friends.

MassDOT seems to be decent human beings who are not perfect, a striking improvement over the stench coming from Cambridge and its accomplices.

The Mass. Pike viaduct currently holds the Mass. Pike and has room for very little else.  The rotters seem to be trying to overload the Mass. Pike viaduct to prevent responsible use of the area, and to maximize the benefits to them of environmental destruction.

The proposal did not please a lot of people who spoke.

To understand the proposal, I am inserting a copy of my proposal from a Green Line A spur between the current viaduct and Boston University.

The Mass. Pike in this area is eight lanes, four lanes in either direction.  The team proposed to tear down and rebuild the facility in place plus new construction to the north of the existing highway.  It is the opinion of MassDOT that the Mass. Pike needs to be widened to bring it up to something vaguely approaching current standards.

The team proposed to build two lanes to the north of the existing highway in an elevated structure, then tear down the two lanes next to the new lanes, then rebuild in that place, repeating the process until completed.

That would allow Green Line A.  That strikes me as a very major positive.

A number of folks objected to the harm to property owned by the reprehensible Department of Conservation and Recreation supposedly for open space.  I am not positive about the nature of the area impacted.  The area I am aware of is the area fronting on the Charles River, which is very tight between the Soldiers Field Road parkway and the Charles River.  This area clearly has been used by waterfowl which have been harmed by maneuverings of the bureaucrats and their environmental destroyers, destruction which always seems to be of no importance to the types who were doing the objecting.

A lot of neighborhood people asked to concentrate on the plans for the new street network to be built near Allston’s Cambridge Street in place of the existing Mass. Pike exits there.

I think that will be discussed at the next meeting, on the 25th.  At the same time, the planners promised to work further on options.

3. Boston Sierra Club.

I have objected to the endorsements of environmentally destructive Cambridge pols as environmental saints, with the assistance of the Cambridge Machine.  I have commented that this situation has turned the Boston Sierra Club into just another of the Cambridge Machine’s fake groups.

The following is an exchange from facebook, presented to give a new approach to the Sierra Club.  I am deficient in my understanding of things because my world is a truly rotten situation in Cambridge, MA, and the truly rotten situation constantly praises the Sierra Club.

************

Robert J. La Trémouille shared The Rainforest Site's photo.
June 7 at 11:45am

Where I come from, the killers of our Earth are endorsed by the local Sierra Club as environmental saints.

Bruce Stegiel 

Where I come from the Sierra Club is paid to do so.

Robert J. La Trémouille

That is interesting. It sounds like you are saying this problem is endemic.

Bruce Stegiel 

Yes. Follow the money. Ego plus money equals public policy stands.

Robert J. La Trémouille

 I have just finished a very extended post on the Charles River White Geese Blog for today.

I do not know if this exchange is usable, but I presume it is ok with you to use it.

Bruce Stegiel 

Sure.

The final comment is dated June 8 at 3:32 pm

H4009, destruction of hundreds of trees and animal habitat on Charles River, Complaint to Cambridge, MA, City Council


1. Report.
[a. Opposition.]
[b. Documents.]
[c. Response to claims city council has no business defending the Charles River from attack.]
2. Cambridge Machine position.
3. Links to latest reports of outrages.
4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
5. Tip.


1. Report.

On Wednesday, June 11, 2014, I filed a complaint with the Cambridge City Council seeking their objections to the H4009, bill in the Massachusetts legislature which will destroy hundreds of excellent trees on the Cambridge side of the Charles River if passed.  The key part is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The letter is structured to present the objections, the plans for destruction, and then my response to the standard con that the Cambridge City Council has no business objecting to destruction in Cambridge on the Charles River.  It has already been posted on line and will be formally transmitted to the Cambridge City Council Monday night.  There are only two “communications” on the agenda, this one and my letter posted yesterday, objecting to the destructive aspects of the Grand Junction proposal.

The City Clerk has posted the letter at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140616%20latremouille%20memorial%20dr_1.PDF

Here is my reprint of the letter.

It read as follows, and I will insert the relevant graphics.

****************

To the Honorable, the Cambridge City Council:

[a. Opposition.]

I am writing individually and as chair of Friends of the White Geese, an Attorney General registered non profit since 2001.

• I request you oppose destruction associated with House Bill H4009.

I very strongly think that the Cambridge City Council should go on record opposing moneys included in House Bill H4009, Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.  This is the much more specific spinoff of H3332 which included $24 million for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge on Memorial Drive and $4 million for “underpasses” under the next three highway bridges destruction which has been condemned by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation as a waste of money and a waste of natural resources.

This is not a minor situation.  As is demonstrated by the below plans, this proposal would destroy hundreds of excellent trees.  It would devastate Cambridge’s treasure of Memorial Drive.

This destruction was coordinated between the Department of Conservation and Recreation and Cambridge city staff.  It has been rejected when Obama moneys were sought in 2009.  The lie to the public then was that the trees were diseased.  The below plans clearly show no diseased trees.

The closest any entity fighting for destruction of these trees comes to supporting destruction is the local Company Union whose position translates as: It is anti Charles River to defend the Charles River.  But have they got a deal for you.  A comparable Company Union used similar arguments to achieve first stage governmental destruction of the irreplaceable Alewife woodlands.

On pages 3 through 10 are the destruction plans including a photo of the most visible single victim, the excellent now mature grove at the Memorial Drive split.

This grove would be devastated and these trees are the smaller of the victims.  This destruction is even viler than the currently impending destruction of the Cambridge Common.

The Cambridge City Council proudly proclaims it is pro environment.

THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENT.  These hundreds of trees should not be wasted.  The world needs these trees a lot more than the contractors paid to destroy them need the money they get paid to destroy.

I will follow the plans with multiple arguments rebutting the nonsensical Cambridge position that the Cambridge City Council should be bothered with destruction on the Charles River by its ongoing accomplice the Department of Conservation and Recreation.  These responses to this nonsensical position start on page 11.

The euphemisms used for the destruction in House Bill H4009, section 2C, read as follows:

************

2890-7020 . . .  $32,000,000 shall be expended to complete the planning, design and construction of Phase II of the Historic Parkways Initiative along the section of the Memorial Drive between the Longfellow Bridge and the Boston University Bridge, also known as the BU Bridge, in the city of Cambridge, to construct and make improvements to pedestrian pathways,bike and paths, . . .................................

*************

As usual, the environment destruction is “omitted” but authorized.

Here are the plans and that key photograph.  I will follow the plans and photograph with  a devastating reponse to yet another piece of silliness offered in place of responsible behavior.  The silly contention that the Cambridge City Council has no business on Memorial Drive.


• The outrage on Memorial Drive, H4009.

The following are the tree destruction plans submitted by the DCR in 2009 when they were seeking Obama moneys to destroy these same hundreds of trees.  At that time, they lied to the press that all the trees were diseased.  There is no indication of diseased trees in these plans, nor when inspecting the doomed trees.  Just more lies from an entity which does a lot of destroying and a lot of lying.

It would be silly to think that there are or will be significant changes, although teasing suggestions are commonly used to further destruction in Cambridge, MA.

The plans start at the BU Bridge, where you are in the process, it would appear of adding to the destruction in your Grand Junction bicycle highway plans.

The darkened, numbered circles designate healthy trees slated for destruction.  Inserted after the 5th plan is a photo of the excellent grove of  trees being destroyed in plans 6 and 7 presented on the following page.  Should you or others wish the electronic version of these plans, the electronic version  totals 481 MB.

I will go into the animal habitat part of the outrage in the opposition to this part of the Grand Junction proposal.

The short of it is that H4009 includes in the very first plan furthers the heartless abuse of the long term resident, beautiful and valuable Charles River White Geese, following up on the outrage this city council paid for at Magazine Beach.  More environment outrage from a city council which loudly calls itself pro environment.

Further casual destruction of animal habitat will proceed throughout the destruction area.

This, most importantly, furthers the outrageous relevant goal of the DCR’s “Charles River Master Plan”, that of killing off or driving away all resident animals, a goal which is also striking contradictory to the City Council’s claim of being pro environment.

Text follows on page 11. [ed: section [c]., below.]

[b. Documents.]

Grove at Memorial Drive Split before
Destruction, Winter Photo

Destruction plans for this excellent
grove on next page.  [ed:  two plan pages per page.  Next two below are of the photo.]

[c. Response to claims city council has no business defending the Charles River from attack.]

• City Council has no business on Memorial Drive?

I have been hearing some strange comments that the Cambridge City Council has no business getting involved in Memorial Drive.

• Save the world but don’t talk to us about Cambridge.

Last I heard, the Cambridge City Council has routinely spoken out on matters in South America, Africa, and wherever.  Memorial Drive, by contrast, is in Cambridge, MA, and this destruction was run past the Cambridge Development Department.

The contrast between saving the world and being “neutral” on irresponsible destruction in Cambridge, MA is striking to someone looking for the truth.

• “Underpasses”

Additionally, the Cambridge City Council has blessed the “underpasses” outrage which has been condemned by MassDOT.  This destruction is targeted at the Western Avenue, River Street and Anderson (Harvard Square) Bridges and their environs.

Last I heard, the destructive “underpasses” you have gone on record supporting were located on Memorial Drive.

The most visible proponent has called the $24 million (H3332, predecessor to H4009) for massive tree destruction incidental to $4 million for the destructive “underpasses.”  So it would appear that the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” claims that your irresponsible support of $4 million destruction included even more irresponsible support of $24 million destruction.

• Magazine Beach

Additionally, the Cambridge City Council spent between one and two million on the project at Magazine Beach which included destructive work which was either kept secret and which was a flat out lie directly in conflict with public contrary positions.  Portions of your achievement there include a bizarre wall of introduced vegetation walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.

The supposedly sacred “Charles River Master Plan” called for a lawn to the river.  It was modified to undo the blatant lie.

You were promised better playing fields.  But you installed sickly grass to replace the healthy responsible grasses there for more than half a century.  You then fed it poisons to keep it alive, and then put in a complicated drainage system to drain off the poisons keeping alive the sickly introduced grasses.  The drainage system decreased the size of playing fields in contrast to the improvements which you were promised.

Your manager of the project repeatedly lied of “no intent” to harm the Charles River White Geese.  You have blocked them from their food of most of the last 33 years at Magazine Beach and have proceeded to starve them.  This does not sound like “no intent” to harm, but I speak English.  Additionally your agent has publicly bragged of starving them.

The fine print of the “Charles River Master Plan” calls for killing off or driving away all resident animals, an achievement you and the DCR did in many acres when you destroyed irreplaceable woods at the Alewife reservation with the assistance of Company Union groups.

My letter of September 19, 2012 to the City Council is attached to my letter on the Grand Junction highway proposal being filed at the same time as this letter.

It includes persuasive photos of the outrage at Magazine Beach in its appendix 3.

Last I heard, Magazine Beach is on Memorial Drive.

• Grand Junction bike highway to be extended beyond common sense.

You recently authorized preparation for funding of a bike highway along the Grand Junction.

The responsible ending for this bike highway would come where the Grand Junction approached the bend in Vassar Street.  There is a tiny distance which would need to be taken through a parking lot there to connect to Vassar Street the distance of one building on either side of Vassar Street to Memorial Drive.

Instead of the responsible ending, the plans you are organizing funding for go beyond this point and cause major destruction in the formerly lush area to which you have confined the Charles River White Geese.  Plus you would install a fence dividing the animal habitat at the railroad tracks, preventing direct access between two areas to which major destruction has been done by your accomplice.

The supposed plans show photographs all over the place but lie through omission by not showing the goose habitat.  Your friends have helped you in the heartless abuse of these beautiful animals by doing very terrible things to the environment in that location already.

Photos of the destruction areas are below and in the appendix.

• False description to you of state plans for the Grand Junction area.

An excellent example of the quality of the staff with which you are working is further information which was suppressed in the 2000s when the City of Cambridge upzoned the area near Putnam Avenue and the railroad tracks.

The staff clearly communicated that, if the Urban Ring subway went forward, a train stop would go there.  Your staff lied by telling you there was only one Urban Ring option.  At the end of this report, I will provide the MBTA plans for both the alternative options in Cambridge.  The one your staff has lied does not exist was adopted as an option in 1991, five years after I first suggested it.  The one which “does not exist” is the likely winner of the two options.

Appendix 1 to the attachment, pages 2, 5, 6 and 7 provide the MBTA’s maps.  The Kenmore Crossing is the one that the Development Department has lied for more than 20 years that it does not exist, and which is now most likely to be the winner.

• Summary on argument which should not exist.

I have no respect for claims that the Cambridge City Council has no business on Memorial Drive.

The claim translates as a claim that the Cambridge City Council has a right to destroy but not to defend the environment.  The claim has the same value as the Development Department Staff’s 20 year insistence that the Urban Ring option which is likely to be the winner does not exist.

• Unexercised rights of the Cambridge City Council on Memorial Drive.

The deal by which you inflicted destruction on Magazine Beach included a provision that the City of Cambridge would take over management.

That has not happened.

I would anticipate it has not happened because the Cambridge City Council does not want to “know” of the outrages achieved there by Cambridge and the DCR.

Exercise your rights.  Insist first, however, that the bizarre wall be treated the same way as bordering vegetation everywhere else on the Charles River Basin, and be chopped down.

Insist that the poisons be stopped and the responsible grasses returned.

Insist that the playing fields delivered to you be the same or better than they were before the destruction commenced.

Insist that the expansion of this outrage blessed through corrupt action of the local Company Union not take place.

• The outrage on Memorial Drive, the secret part of the Grand Junction proposal.

The supposed plans do not show what you are destroying.  This is part of the usual packages of omissions.  Keep it secret.  I will go into this outrage in a separate communication concerning this deliberately secret destruction.

• Conclusion.

I beg of you.

You claim to be pro environment.

This outrage is most definitely not pro environment.  It is highly destructive of the environment and exactly the opposite of your claims of being pro environment.

Please oppose House Bill H4009, Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.


2. Cambridge Machine position.

This is one of the many things which the Cambridge Machine’s fake group is fighting for as a company union.  Loudly claim to be on the side of the good guys and prevent and all meaningful action while slapping in destructive stuff even if corrupt tactics are necessary.

We are the be all and end all.  How dare anybody discuss anything except what we dictate!

The same tactic used to fight for acres of irreplaceable woodlands at Alewife.

Standard company union corrupt tactics .


3. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

a. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
b. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.

I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

5. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.

Cambridge, MA, USA: Destructive Grand Junction “bike highway” responded to.

On Wednesday, June 11, 2014, Cambridge City Councilor Dennis Carlone convened his Transportation & Public Utilities Committee to discuss a highway proposal for the Grand Junction Railroad including the Destroyed Nesting Area. the area to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined and starved.

The meeting was convened on short notice without explanation.  The likely explanation was that the Massachusetts Department of Transportation conducted its community liaison meeting on the Massachusetts Turnpike rearrangement later that evening.  I will report on that meeting later.

As usual, the real reasons were kept as secret as possible, and the real reasons are the problems with the Grand Junction Highway proposal.

The really destructive aspect of this proposal is its attack on the Charles River and on the Charles River White Geese.

Here is the map of this end of the proposal.  The route would destroy the undestroyed part of the Destroyed Nesting Area, and go straight through the most delicate part of the area.  Note the U at the bottom.

The reason for the rush in the meeting scheduling is that Cambridge Machine is dreaming of extending their destruction to the Boston side.  That, in turn would be targeted at getting Harvard a very expensive subway connection to their planned relocation of the Harvard Medical School to the south side of the Charles River in Allston.

A major part of the game is that a much less expensive and more sensible rapid transit connection to the relocated Harvard Medical School could be prevented by overloading the area at the far end of the Grand Junction railroad bridge.  So the Cambridge Machine and its accomplices are working at overloading that area.

The Cambridge City Clerk’s on line posting of the September 20, 2012 letter which I physically attached to the below letter is at http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/LaTremouille%20com.pdf.

The letter which I delivered on Wednesday was addressed to the City Council and to Carlone’s committee.  It was filed with a detailed letter on H4009 which would destroy hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge plus, to no great surprise, massive animal habitat.  I will post that shortly.

***********

RE: Grand Junction Highway Proposal

To The Honorable, the Cambridge City Council:

Enclosed herewith and made a part of this letter is my communication of September 19, 2012 on this subject, minus appendix 4 which was disorganized, confusing and a bad idea.

Nothing has changed on this proposal.  The portion south of Memorial Drive is irresponsibly long and expensive.  It has no value except to the contractors paid to do the work, and to Harvard as possible real beneficiary of the environmental destruction and increased heartless animal abuse involved.  Additionally, however, since the Department of Conservation and Recreation, in its Charles River Master Plan, aims to kill off or drive away all resident animals, this sick goal and sick agency would be benefitted.

Responsible planning would connect the bike highway to the Paul Dudley White Bike Path by connecting to Vassar Street at the point where it turns one small property width from the Grand Junction and behind one building facing on Memorial Drive.  The ultimate goal really is to move the bike highway to this location for reuse by Harvard for an off ramp from the Mass. Pike to Cambridge, and to use the bike highway as a stalking horse in the meantime.

Here are photographs from the Grand Junction side and the Vassar Street side of the responsible connection location.  The bike highway would be routed from the Grand Junction on the near side of the white building in what is currently a parking lot.  This location is readily visible from the Paul Dudley White bike path looking up the final leg of Vassar Street.

The Development Department, in contrast to the rest of the Grand Junction route, has kept the location south of Memorial Drive as secret as possible.

Here is a map of the area to which the Charles River White Geese are confined without food.  It is taken from the DCR’s massive destruction proposal for the highway package buried in House Bill H4009 to which I have given an extended analysis in a letter being submitted to the City Council with this letter.

Memorial Drive extends from right to left with the Ghetto to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined to the bottom left.  Additional heartless cruelty has been inflicted on them there after Cambridge and the DCR started heartlessly starving them as a result of secret provisions in the destructive project at Magazine Beach.  Details as to the outrage at Magazine Beach are in the attachment.

The Grand Junction railroad runs from bottom to top and left to right.  The responsible connection for the bike highway is slightly above this plan and would connect to Memorial Drive close to the BU Boathouse which, in turn, is to the right of this plan.

To the left is the BU Bridge.  The black marking in the middle left is yet another tree proposed to be stupidly destroyed.  On the right is the wooded area which is currently part of the animal habitat but which would be separated by a new fence in this proposal.  Interestingly, the tree destruction plan shows no trees in this wooded area, apparently more planned destruction kept secret.

Following [On the next page] is a photo of two residents being heartlessly attacked.

The Charles River is straight ahead.

A fence would be constructed on the near side of the railroad track which, with care, can be seen beyond the two geese.  This would bar access by resident animals through this area to the wild area between the railroad track and the BU Boathouse.

Vegetation destruction has been massive by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” working for the DCR and by irresponsible rail workers with the support of the DCR.

The temporary bike highway would be built where the resident animals are standing and would be run down the side of the supporting hill, behind the camera.  Then it would run through an area solely used by free animals, most visibly by the Charles River White Geese.  This area has been repeatedly attacked by irresponsible action by the DCR and its friends.  “Mitigation” of the BU Bridge project has been an insult in part and an overload to the extent it has done anything, exactly what is expected from a reprehensible agency whose goal is to kill off or drive away resident animals.

The sanctified “Charles River Master Plan” is obeyed most importantly as is convenient for environmental destruction.

The promise of a lawn to the river at Magazine Beach was turned into the ONLY area bordering on the Charles in which introduced vegetation has been allowed to grow and grow and grow rather than being chopped down every year.  The lawn has been turned into a wall barring access to an from the Charles River.  This satisfies the goals of a reprehensible agency: starve the Charles River White Geese.

The ONLY mention in the Grand Junction Highway report of this active, 33 year resident, gaggle is one never identified goose head in the continuation sheet.

Here is a photo of the gaggle under the large tree which is also behind the camera in the above picture.  The ground vegetation was destroyed promptly after the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” started destroying the environment for the DCR.  Since the ground vegetation has not come back, poison must have been used.

Everything else these valuable, popular 33 year residents had has been destroyed to them by the irresponsible, SECRET destruction included in the Magazine Beach outrage.  Responsible action by the Cambridge City Council could restore to Magazine Beach the responsible improvements which were promised in the first place.

And these excellent animals should be restored to the major tourist attraction they were before the secret behavior which furthers the DCR animal destructive goals.

Further outrages were authorized by the DCR by irresponsible railroad workers who were too lazy to walk a few hundred feet or so to park next to Memorial Drive.  The Cambridge Conservation Commission objected to the irresponsible behavior.  DCR told the lazy workers to move beyond the jurisdiction of the CCC, and no further.  This tree is beyond the CCC jurisdiction, and DCR has contempt for the environment and its animals, while publicly lying the opposite.

Both this and the preceding photo were taken last Sunday, June 8, 2014.

The vegetation in the background of this photo is native vegetation which the Charles River “Conservancy” acting for the DCR, failed to destroy.  Some of the vegetation not destroyed by the CRC was destroyed by the irresponsible railroad workers.

There are words in the report which talk of some sort of bike highway to Boston, no plans, just talk.  The DCR and MassDOT have expressed contempt for the idea in their meetings concerning interconnectivity among transportation modes on the Charles River.

The real key can be seen off in the distance of the following photo of the Boston extension of the Boston end of the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge.

The green sign straight ahead and to the right is a sign over the Mass. Pike.  Harvard purchased Beacon Yards and the Mass. Pike exit to Allston and Cambridge for the location of its future Medical School, etc.  The purchase was made shortly after an MBTA study demonstrated an off ramp can be built to Cambridge over the Grand Junction Bridge.

So we have a fake / temporary bike highway acting as a stalking horse until Harvard needs to use the off ramp, and we have hundreds of trees being destroyed on Memorial Drive in H4009 to straighten out Memorial Drive to take the traffic.

The real game however, is as follows:

The rail yards to the left were purchased by Harvard after the MBTA demonstrated that the Grand Junction Bridge could be used as an off ramp to Cambridge.  The bridge in the middle is the BU Bridge.  Under it is the Grand Junction railroad bridge.

The MBTA study showed that the room in the Mass. Pike viaduct (under corresponding words) has next to no spare room and that ramp access would take up all that room.

That viaduct is being rebuilt.  The key issue is what else will be in the very narrow area where it currently stands.

Harvard has proposed a horribly expensive deep bore Red Line spur to connect from Harvard Station to Harvard’s relocated Medical School to the Harvard / Longwood Medical Area.  Harvard’s Red Line spur would wipe out and rebuild the existing passenger access area in Harvard Station.

The responsible alternative to Harvard gold plated proposal is a Green Line A spur (dark green line above) connecting the Medical School to Green Line B on Commonwealth Avenue, and then to Kenmore Square from which access could be accomplished to the Harvard / Longwood Medical Area.

My extended analyses to MassDOT are as follows:

1. Introductory, spelling out the route:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/to-massdot-harvard-is-trying-to-kill.html.

2. The currently available location of the responsible route.  Will room continue to be available?  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-green-line-streetcar-light-rail.html.

3. The real record of too many “advocates.”  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/massdot-to-present-in-cambridge-ma.html.

4. Mass Pike rearrangement and Rapid Transit planning:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/mass-pike-rearrangement-and-rapid.html.

I did not attach these communications because the package is pretty big only attaching the 2012 letter and its informative attachments.

Building bike highway / Memorial Drive off ramp, and other additions in the rebuilt viaduct area are of value primarily to prevent a Green Line A and make Harvard’s gold plated Red Line spur the “only possible” rapid trans service to and from Harvard’s relocated Medical School.  This is because of the extreme limited space in the viaduct area.

It should be noted that MassDOT has experience with what passes for “public” input in Cambridge in the outrageous “underpasses” proposal and in the dirty tricks by which the Cambridge Machine tried to fool folks into supporting passenger service on the Grand Junction railroad.  The pitch on the latter was: You can’t win, but have I got a deal for you!!!

Kindly kill that portion of the Grand Junction highway proposal south of Memorial Drive.  It is irresponsible and highly destructive.  It is wasteful of natural resources.  It inflicts heartless abuse to the resident animal population.  It assists in the reprehensible goal of the DCR to kill off / drive away its residents animals.  And is a waste of city money.

Plus the Vassar Street route, to which the bike highway should be relocated, is shorter and highly reasonable.

Plus the Vassar Street route would be of value to the tourist related business on Memorial Drive.

And you would refrain from causing more irritation to the responsible Massachusetts Department of Transportation.

The nonsense associated with this proposal has already be rejected by MassDOT inasmuch as they have clearly stated that they have no intention to do anything on the Mass. Pike reconstruction which impacts Cambridge.

Sincerely,



Robert J. La Trémouille

Attachment:

My letter of September 19, 2012 to the Cambridge City Council and to Councilor / Representative Timothy Toomey, Chair Committee on Economic Development Training and Employment, with attachments as stated therein, except that appendix 4 is not attached.
Thus three attached photos and appendices 1 through 3 as follows:

Photo 1: Section 1, Charles River to Ft. Washington Park (RWT/ BRT), Option 2: Trail with Bus Rapid Transit.
Photo 2: Recommendation showing fencing.
Photo 3: Developer’s map of Alewife.  (Note: Area nearest the marking “Alewife Brook Reservation” has been destroyed by Cambridge and the DCR.
Appendix 1. Reality on the Urban Ring plans.
Appendix 2. Ongoing outrages at Alewife.
Appendix 3. Environmental Nightmare at Magazine Beach / The Destroyed Nesting Area.

**************

The prior letter is posted at: http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/LaTremouille%20com.pdf.

I90 / Mass. Pike Rearrangement South of the Charles River — Maps and Links

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation will be having a third meeting on this project this evening in the Allston neighborhood of Boston.

They have set up a good web page with a lot of information on it, at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/AllstonI90InterchangeImprovementProject.aspx.

Additionally, the page includes an excellent map of the area which I am posting.

[map]

The Charles River is at the top with Magazine Beach above it to the right.  That is probably the BU Bridge crossing the Charles River at the top border to the right.  The Mass. Pike viaduct is the thin, pointed part of the study area aimed to the top right.  Barely visible stretching under the BU Bridge and to the right toward the Mass. Pike viaduct is the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge.

The map gives the impression that the area that the Department of Transportation is working with goes to the Charles River.  My recollection is that they have specifically said it does not include Soldiers Field Road / Storrow Drive, the limited access boulevard which parallels the Charles River on the Boston side.

The boulevard coming from the top right corner is Commonwealth Avenue.

In an earlier report I showed how to create a Green Line A spur connecting the new Harvard Medical School (in planning on top of as much as they can get away with) to the existing Red Line B which runs on Commonwealth Avenue, I commented that all that was needed to connect the new spur to the existing line is old technology, a switch which would allow the connection.  That comment said the new switch would duplicate an existing switch at Packard’s Corner.

If you follow Commonwealth Avenue downwards, you will see a much larger boulevard running to the right.  That much larger boulevard is Commonwealth Avenue.  Straight ahead is a different street, Brighton Avenue.  The “square” where they split is Packard’s Corner, named after a long dead car dealership.

The existing switches are (or were) where Green Line B turns with Commonwealth Avenue.  The former Green Line A went straight ahead on Brighton Avenue.

Here is my map showing the Green Line A proposal to put things in context.

[my map]

The rail yards are to the left rather than being in the middle.

Charles River: Sunday at the Destroyed Nesting Area, in Context; Protect against Destruction

1. Report.
A. Little guys a week later.
B. A swig of the River.
C. A couple under direct attack by a lying City Council.
D. Vegetation remnants.
E. Vestigial Brown China Goose.
F. Part of the Gaggle.
G. The latest starvation wall.
H. H4009.
2. Analysis.  Destruction and a bad Cambridge City Council’s Convenient “Realities.”
A. Reality, the Cambridge Machine and the Cambridge City Council.
B. “Neutrality” about the Charles River?  And what is your next lie?
(1) Destructive North South Bike Highway.
(2) Destructive East West Bike Highway.
(3) Destruction at Magazine Beach.
(4) And more.
3. Links to latest reports of outrages.
4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
5. Tip.


1. Report.

A. Little guys a week later.

[722, 0730]

I showed you these two last week.  At this distance, it is not easy to tell the difference, but they are significantly larger.  I looked for other babies I saw last week, but did not see them.  The adolescent could possibly be sufficiently big now it is impossible to tell the difference.

B. A swig of the River.

[724, 725]

C. A couple under direct attack by a lying City Council.

[726]

The Cambridge City Council voted to seek funding from the Cambridge City Manager for a bike highway along the Grand Junction railroad and THROUGH THE NESTING AREA OF THE Charles River White Geese.

You can see the Charles River in the background.

The bike highway would split this area with a fence, preventing direct access to the wild area on the far side of the railroad tracks, and go straight through the destroyed nesting area.

If Cambridge had a responsible city government, the bike highway would stop north of Memorial Drive, which is to the left of this couple.  It would cut through a small parking lot at the corner where Vassar Street turns, and go to Memorial Drive from there.

The supposed goal of the Cambridge City Council is to provide access to the Paul Dudley White Bike Path on Memorial Drive.  The route they are using is roundabout, destructive to the environment, and expensive.  But the contractors paid to create this outrage and anybody with contempt for the environment will love it.

[ photos]

The two photos show the building between the tracks and Vassar Street, first from the track side, then from Vassar Street.  Just go to the left of the building, a small taking of a tiny part of the parking lot.

This corner is readily visible from Memorial Drive.  There is one major building on either side of the road, and straight ahead are the buildings before the turn.

See further analysis below.  A common lie from the Cambridge Machine and Cambridge City Councilors is that, while South America and Africa is within their jurisdiction, the Charles River is not.

D. Vegetation remnants.

[0723, 727]

The first photo is an accouterment to the Charles.  My guess is that this is destruction dating back to the irresponsible railroad workers who were assisted in their destruction by the Department of Conservation and Recreation.  It would be nice to see it remain, but one of the first things the CRC did in its destruction was “clean up” such “unsightly” examples of wildness.

The second photo is undergrowth probably destroyed by the railroad workers with the collusion of the DCR.

E. Vestigial Brown China Goose.

[0728]

The white shapes are members of the gaggle with the standard markings.

The goose straight ahead is a male who was hatched in the mid 2000s from two white geese.

He is the second goose with vestigial brown marking that I am aware of.  The other was Brown Beauty, hatched in 1996 from Bumpy, the leader of the gaggle, and his mate.  Brown Beauty trained her babies to hold the responsibility to replace Bumpy when he left.

I have not seen Brown Beauty recently.  I must presume she is deceased.  That would be an 18 year life span.

F. Part of the Gaggle.

[729]

It is now summer.  They are under the big tree getting protection from the sun.  This area was part of the area most attacked by the irresponsible railroad workers and the DCR.  You can see remnants of crushed stone wantonly dumped on the ground.

Major parts of this area were part of the destruction which occurred when the CRC started destroyed for the DCR.  They find ground vegetation offensive.  They obviously have no problems with dirt.  They must have used poison because nothing has grown back where they destroyed.

Until the Cambridge City Council and the DCR destroyed their access to Magazine Beach with parts of that irresponsible project which were implemented with flat out lies and omissions, they would be at Magazine Beach feeding.

G. The latest starvation wall.

[731, 732]

This was a parting gift after last year’s destruction.

It keeps the Charles River White Geese from even the meager access to scrumptious grass on the other side of the on ramp to Memorial Drive.  This is where the railroad workers should have been parking.

The Charles River White Geese are responsible jaywalkers.  They stand by the side of the ramp and wait until all traffic is quiet.  Then they cross.

They do have a problem in that they are geese.  Geese tend to wander.  The drivers sit there and love them.

But the DCR is rotten and the Cambridge City Council is rotten.

H. H4009.

H4009 is in the process of approvals.  It would run from the BU Bridge to the Longfellow Bridge including the humble area where and irresponsible Cambridge City Council and DCR have consigned these beautiful animals.

It would destroy hundreds of trees and animal habitat.

It may be found at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4009.

The key part is section 2C, 2890-7020

The most certain thing NOT to think is: They would never stoop so long.

The DCR and Cambridge City Council have too long, too destructive a record.

Please make the contacts listed below.

Thank you.

2. Analysis.  Destruction and a bad Cambridge City Council’s Convenient “Realities.”

A. Reality, the Cambridge Machine and the Cambridge City Council.

When dealing with the Cambridge Machine, it is silly to try to distinguish between the knaves and the fools.  They all sound alike.  They all are devoid of inconvenient realities, living in a world which comports with the instructions of their handlers.  They are all the enemy until proven otherwise.

With regard to the Cambridge City Council reality is a different matter.

The Cambridge City Council has a duty to be competent.  They are the ones making the decisions.
If they persist in total nonsense and a clear disinterest in reality, they are responsible for their own contempt for reality, nobody else.

I use strong words referring to the Cambridge Machine and to members of the Cambridge City Council.

I do so because strong words are accurate and because the institutionalized contempt for reality in the Cambridge Machine will not be swayed, if at all, by anything less than strong words.

I do so with regard to the Cambridge City Council because in their position whether they are knaves or fools is completely irrelevant.  They are the ones doing or assisting a very significant part of the destruction.

This is not a matter of politely ignoring a deficiency, even if such is no longer politically correct anyway.  This a matter of standing up to institutionalized and mass implemented lying.

B. “Neutrality” about the Charles River?  And what is your next lie?

(1) Destructive North South Bike Highway.

All CURRENT incumbents voted to request the City Manager to go forward on the Grand Junction bike highway including the outrage south of Memorial Drive.

And how dare you mention reality!!!

(2) Destructive East West Bike Highway.

All carryover incumbents voted for the irresponsible “underpass” proposal for destruction in the area of the next three bridges.  The responsible entity, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation condemns the project as wasteful of money and environement.

The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” says that the predecessor to H4009 included $4 million for the irresponsible underpasses and, wading through lying euphemisms, $24 million for destruction of hundreds of trees animal habitat.

The numbers in H4009 seem to be larger.

Everything is coordinated between the DCR and the Cambridge staff.

And how dare you mention reality!!!

(3) Destruction at Magazine Beach.

The current situation of the Charles River White Geese is the result of a bizarre wall of INTRODUCED vegetation which the DCR never cuts.  It is at the water’s end and destroys access between the Charles River and the food on the playing fields.

The responsible grass which was there for the better part of a Century has been destroyed and replaced with sickly stuff which required poisons to survive.

Playing fields have been destroyed to create expensive drainage systems for the poisons.

Cambridge paid a significant part of the costs.  The agreement said Cambridge would assume control of Magazine Beach at the end of the constrjuction.

The key manager non stopped lied that he had “no intent” to harm the Charles River White Geese. He has publicly bragged of starving them.  The “Charles River Master Plan” is designate a holy book by the Cambridge Machine.  It calls for the killing of or driving away of all resident animals.

But the Cambridge City Council is happiest lying about their own sainthood.  They have never taken responsibility for the outrage they have created at Magazine.  If they did, they should require that the outrages be undone.

But the con game in Cambridge is the sainthood of the Cambridge City Council.  And part of the con is that everybody else is responsible for their destructiveness.

And how dare you mention reality!!

(4) And more.

I have forgotten more than I can add to this report.

And how dare you mention reality!!!

3. Links to latest reports of outrages.

a. House Bill H4009, tree and habitat destruction on Memorial Drive between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

b. Cambridge Common.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

(1) http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
(2) http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

On June 3, 2014, I posted on YouTube my presentation of that letter, at http://youtu.be/FgQ9ojVuMxM.

4. Contacts: Protect against destruction.

[3 photos]

I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

H4009 may be viewed at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4009.

The key part is section 2C, 2890-7020

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

5. Tip.

The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.

It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging.

There are four out of nine newcomers.  One might be subject to persuasion.  The balance could be possibly be embarrassed into decency.  I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge.  It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.”  The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.

Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness.  Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.