The Wild Reeds
Les roseaux sauvages.
The Boston Courant reports that the famous Fenway reeds, hated and beloved, are "likely here to stay".
An article in this week's edition says: "The city's Parks and Rec Department anticipates being denied a request to mow a larger area of the invasive phragmites, commonly known as reeds, which residents and city officials cite as a public safety issue."
This is the latest in a long battle to Esplanadize that bend of the Muddy River, a move that some claim would eliminate unwanted elements from the area.
According to the paper:
While the reeds remain, gardeners at the nearby Victory Gardens continue to experience vandalism in their gardens and discover drug paraphernalia in their crops and tool storage areas.While I'm philosophical about Esplanadization — it could be lovely if done right and well-maintained — I'm not so sure there's any reason to believe that mowing the reeds will halt the nightly wild rumpus in the Victory Gardens, which are, themselves, almost impossible to patrol.
..."When the reeds finally disappear," [Fenway Garden Society President Tim Horn told the paper], "we'll be in much better shape as far as crime goes."
Eradication of the Phragmites may, in fact, have the opposite of the desired effect, driving the wild rumpus further into the dark heart of the Victory Gardens, and wreaking even more havoc amongst the cabbages.
But it doesn't look like we'll know for sure any time soon.
Hi, Mike - I've posted a link to this at Fenway News Online. Thanks for keeping track of what's going on in the neighborhood.
http://www.fenwaynews.org/miscellaneous/news-notes-august-24-2/
Reply to this
It's unbelievable that the City can't manage to keep this relatively small area in the heart of Boston, surrounded by major institutions, college kids and families, safe and clean. BPD won't patrol the area as it should because it's AFRAID that those involved in criminal activity might claim civil rights violations (oh yeah, now I have lots of confidence in the cops protecting us); Parks Dept. won't clean up the resulting mess from public sex and drug activity (endless used condoms, needles, human waste, bloody tissues, bum wipes); the process for cutting the reeds is such a nonsensical, needlessly bureaucratic tangle that it seems intentionally designed to allow pathetic politicians/agencies like Menino, Ross, DEP, Conservation Commission etc. off the hook for taking any responsibility and effectively fixing the problem. How about some common sense solutions like increased lighting, enforcing the park's closing time, fencing off the Victory Gardens, security cameras?! We all know that Menino, Ross, BPD, DEP are just waiting for the furor to simmer down so they are relieved from pretending to do something to address this problem and can go back to really doing nothing. $$ Developers in the area must step up here because the situation in this part of the Fens directly affects property value. Sadly, the City's inability to address the Fens problem is a reflection of how poorly this City is run in general.
Reply to this
You touch on a lot of different individuals, groups, and activities here that may or may not be related, and I think it's important not to conflate them.
You write: "BPD won't patrol the area as it should because it's AFRAID that those involved in criminal activity might claim civil rights violations." This is clearly a swipe at gay men who cruise there.
But the cruising is one scene, and while it may overlap with the drugs, vandalism, and mass-crappings, there are lots of other populations that frequent the park during the day and after dark -- the homeless, friendly neighborhood addicts, marauding teens -- who are all responsible for their share as well. Part of what we're dealing with in the Fens is the challenge of any city park like the Fens -- which is, after all, a seven-acre playground in the middle of Boston. Of course people are going to go there and get high, or cruise, or make mischief.
None of which is to say that dealing with the public safety issues you cite aren't important, although I think radically changing the nature of the park by fencing it in or installing security cameras is not only prohibitively expensive, but also an overreaction to what's going on there.
Reply to this
The bottom line is that illegal activity (public sex and drug use) that is causing a health issue with various refuse in a public area shouldn't be tolerated. I would feel the same way if this was a spot for straight people, lesbians, martians, etc.
Reply to this
And that's precisely my point. That it is a spot for straight people, lesbians, martians, etc.
Reply to this
Let me guess: and some of your best friends are gay, right?
Public sex is not necessarily illegal in Massachusetts, and much of what goes on in the Fens after dark would not be considered illegal under MA law. See Commonwealth v. Ferguson http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15693295453479297406&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
Reply to this
Mike, what's YOUR solution to the needles, human waste, assaults, prostitution, used condoms that make a substantial section of our public park dangerous and off-limits to the public (excepting the fringe element that's claimed this area)? Since you consider fencing and cameras an "overraction" perhaps a group hug and we sing kumbaya? Parks in well run cities have security cameras so EVERYONE can enjoy public spaces in safety. And fyi, there are cameras ALL OVER BOSTON. The Fens rose garden is fenced off and closed at night, why not the Victory Gardens?
Reply to this
Your comment disregards the reality of the park, and shows an ignorance of the actual scope of the situation there, but you seem distressed about it, so I’ll try to address the biggest misconceptions.
What I wrote was: "I think radically changing the nature of the park by fencing it in or installing security cameras is not only prohibitively expensive" -- that is, it's not gonna happen -- "but also an overreaction to what's going on there." And that’s what I meant.
Let's take the first part first. You seem to know an awful lot about the Victory Gardens so I imagine you know what a trial it has been to just get our rudimentary perimeter fencing replaced. The cost of fencing the whole garden in would be well beyond anyone's means. Not to mention a total betrayal of Olmsted’s vision (and to be fair he did not envision victory gardens there, either, although he could more easily have envisioned them than a gated community). You could not possibly push through a plan to fence in the Fens, even under dire circumstances, due to the historic nature of the park.
It’s not going to happen on so many levels that even squawking about it is a waste of energy. But, even if it were possible, which it is absolutely not, fencing wouldn't guarantee a safer park. All of the gardens in the fens are fenced, and they are routinely broken into. The cost and the nature of the project might be justified if the place were really the hotbed of iniquity some people say it is. But it's simply not. And, as I said, even if it were, it’s not and never will be on the table.
To use the Kelleher Rose Garden as an example shows an extraordinary lack of, I dunno – mathematical aptitude let’s call it , since the rose garden is a tiny fraction of the size of our seven-acre park (it’s about the size of four or five of our individual gardens put together – and we have over 400 plots).
As for overreacting. This is my sixth year as a gardener in the Victory Gardens, and I am there literally every day, often for hours at a time, and I have had to deal with everything you've mentioned here, and every gardener I know has, too. But the Fens is hardly a shit-heap, like the alarmists make it sound. For all that goes on there -- or could were it not such a loved resource for so many, with so many caretakers looking after it already -- it is a pretty safe and clean park. (Check out thousands of my pics here if you don't believe me that it's beautiful.)
I personally know nothing about the prostitution you mention. If you do, then you're much further into some scene there than I am. And as for the rest of it, please. You make it sound like Mogadishu. You may have had some negative experiences in the park – if so, please share! – and I hope that you reported any untoward activity to the police, but the statistics simply don't show great cause for alarm. Nor are those I know -- gay, straight, young, old, and very old -- in fear of their lives there. Nor, by any stretch of the imagination is "a substantial section of our public park dangerous and off-limits to the public". I stress: not by any stretch of the imagination.
So yes, I think you're overreacting a little.
Ask anyone who actually spends any time there gardening or birding or jogging or strolling about what goes on there and they will tell you it’s more in the nature of a nuisance. And the park and the people who love it do a tremendous job of self-policing it. It is, truly, a community garden.
As far as making it better. I've very publicly praised the police for their presence there, and my hope, if I'm elected to the 2011 board, is that next summer will be filled with positive, productive community activities in the heart of the gardens, everything from regular workshops open to all to special events like a tiny houses and green tech exhibition.
By bringing in more constructive community activities we can make the park an even better, safer place for all. Yes, it’s still in the heart of a city, and yes, it will still attract other elements. But the more we strengthen the community there, the more positive the whole community experience will be.
You could call that your "group hug/kumbaya" approach. I don’t mind.
Reply to this
Where would all the drunken straight sox fans go to take a leak after the big game if you fenced off the victory gardens???
Reply to this
"The city's Parks and Rec Department anticipates being denied a request"
Denied? By whom?
Reply to this
By teh gays!
Reply to this
If people have sex in the reeds in the middle of the night, I don't see what the big deal is. If you're out there at three in the morning you should expect some shady activity. Why are people more upset about the gays than drug users and violent criminals? Because that's definitely the feeling I get: it's the gays that are the problem! It's "public sex" that's the problem! But why is it a problem if it doesn't effect you? And do people assume that all the other activity is by gays or because of gays? Because that's sometimes how it seems.
Reply to this