Forgot your password?
New user?
‘Progressive’ City Council abuses vulnerable persons—and free speech
Schuster: prepare kids for the long term
East Cambridge Property
Learning from the Goldschmidt Report: Land Reform and American Agriculture
Document Actions
How blue-green are your algae - er, candidates?
On September 24, eight Cambridge city councilors (Galluccio being absent) voted to urge the city’s legislative delegation to “assure that work goes forward at Magazine Beach according to the current timeline.” That timeline requires that contracts be put out to bid this month, if construction is to begin in 2008.
This is a joint project of the City of Cambridge and the State Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). Cambridge has placed $1.5 million in escrow for it, to be released at the Governor’s discretion.
Cambridge voters should ask candidates where they stand on exposure to pesticides and other chemicals at Magazine Beach, on the Charles River cleanup and rising water rates to pay for it, and on the city’s environmental policy.
The fields at Magazine Beach already accommodate a regulation Little League field, soccer, frisbee, golf practice, other active uses. They also include "Bordering Land Subject to Flooding"—rich habitat for wildlife and, for city dwellers, a place for contact with the natural world.
A second regulation Little League field is less than 200 yards away, at Lindstrom Field near the Morse School.
Paying for poison
At Magazine Beach, Cambridge’s $1.5 million will replace seven acres of dirt and grass adapted to the riverfront with seven acres of gravel, topsoil, commercial sod, an irrigation system, and fences for professional level fields. This work will destroy habitat for wildlife and humans.
The Magazine project’s prototype can be seen in Ebersol Fields at Lederman Park in Boston, near Mass General Hospital. DCR documents filed with the Boston Conservation Commission indicate a plan for ongoing maintenance with fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals. They list “slow-release organic fertilizers” and “integrated pest management practices using biological controls and minimizing [but not prohibiting] the use of chemical alternatives.” The cost is estimated at $200,000 per year.
Fertilizers, organic or not, contain nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium that wash into the river. Pesticides contribute other chemicals. Fertilizer runoff is a recognized source of blue-green algae blooms (cyanobacteria).
Standard care of a home lawn is five applications of fertilizer, six of herbicides, and one of pesticides from early spring to late fall. Applied at the recommended annual rate for medium-high maintenance of a home lawn, the actual nitrogen at Ebersol would weigh half a ton. These fields are professional level, though. They need even more fertilizer in addition to the other chemicals. The effects on water quality won't be good.
In July, 2006, Ebersol Fields developed a fungus. This is common with overwatered, fertilized turf kept from its ordinary summer dormancy. The DCR got permission to apply “Tartan,” a fungicide, to the entire 6 acres. The first application was August 10-11, the second, September 1. Geller Sport, DCR designer of Ebersol, supplemented the two fungicide treatments with additional fertilization and irrigation.
Toxic Tartan
The label warning for “Tartan” reads: “Toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Do not apply directly to water, to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas . . . . Drift and runoff from treated areas may be hazardous to fish/aquatic organisms in adjacent sites. . . Do not apply when weather conditions favor runoff or drift.”
Runoff from these 6 acres polluted the Charles River in 2006 and 2007, creating a health hazard. In ‘06 the blue-green algae count exploded after the first Tartan treatment and fertilization, then dropped toward the end of August. After that, the count climbed again, forcing cancellation of the Charles River Swim. Once in the river, algae will return each summer Organizers moved the 2007 swim from September to July, hoping to beat the algae.
As it was, the bloom was earlier this year and almost forced another cancellation. Many who had signed up opted not to race. Those who did were warned about reactions to the algae and advised to shower soon after finishing. Most found the blue-green stuff inside their suits afterwards and were eager to wash off.
If Cambridge proceeds at Magazine Beach, residents can expect even greater algae blooms from the combined effects of Magazine Beach and Ebersol Fields. They can say goodbye to hopes of swimming in the Charles and hello to higher water bills. It has already taken $60 million to clean up the river, with $19 million more to go before 2013. How much it might cost to deal with the algae Cambridge wants to buy with $1.5 million, no one knows.
Playing in poison
In return, Cambridge gets first priority to expose public school children, Little League and Cambridge Youth Soccer players to the chemicals necessary to maintain the fields. These are the groups invoked to justify the project. As a DCR spokesperson explained, such chemicals provide “the quality of turf our players deserve.”
All city council incumbents running for reelection voted in favor of this project on September 24.
On October 3, Councillor Murphy heartily endorsed it, saying it should have been done years ago.
Candidate Seidel voted in favor of it on the Conservation Commission in September, 2006, even Ebersol Fields’ role in the astronomical bloom that summer.
School Committee candidate Marc McGovern, as President of Cambridge Little League, endorsed the project in the Cambridge Chronicle in May.
MRGRA meeting