Debates swirling over the prohibition at Jamaica Pond
By David Abel | GLOBE STAFF | July 15, 2008
By David Abel | GLOBE STAFF | July 15, 2008
The water sparkles
like a mirage in the summer sun, taunting joggers, fishermen, and neighbors
such as Tom Fendley, who has long gazed at the liquid remnants of a glacier and
wondered what it would be like to take a dip - without breaking the law.
Over the past year,
after wading into its placid warmth, the 37-year-old writer has been asking
city officials why he could be arrested for swimming in Jamaica Pond,
which on a good day mirrors the clear blue of a cloudless sky.
"I found the
responses from the city unsatisfying," Fendley said.
Officials told him
that it would be too dangerous and that he could be arrested for trespassing,
but, to him, it seemed easy enough to hire lifeguards and allot an area along
the beach designed by Frederick Law Olmsted. Officials said it would ruin the
serenity of the pond to have children screaming and splashing, even though he
thought it could be limited to a few months and be regulated by time and
numbers. Officials told him it was a backup for the city's water supply, but
the 68-acre, spring-fed pond has not provided water to the city since 1848 and
would have to be treated if it were ever reconnected to the system.
So a few months ago
Fendley sent a letter to the neighborhood newspaper, asking: "Why not
allow Jamaica Plainers and others to swim in Jamaica Pond? Would it not be great to
have a local swimming hole, where the community can come together around one of
the oldest human pastimes in a beautiful setting?"
It was not such a
novel idea. Before the city began enforcing a no-swimming ordinance in 1975,
people of all ages could be found cooling off in the pond. The Parks and
Recreation Department even used to hold aquatic extravaganzas dubbed
"Water Wonderland," which attracted thousands of spectators and
featured water skiing competitions, rowing contests between firefighters and
police officers, and a fashion show by the pond's lifeguards.
Now, after a
succession of heat waves and with few outdoor pools or other pristine bodies of
water nearby, more residents are asking similar questions about swimming in the
pond.
But there is
passionate opposition. In a letter in the Jamaica Plain Gazette, Patrick Lally
called Fendley's ideas "naive and shortsighted."
"Can you
imagine the deafening din of children from every corner of the city descending
on the pond? Yikes!" wrote Lally, 43, who lives on Sumner Hill. "I
would venture to guess that the garbage generated, the noise, the mayhem, the
increased parking would in fact deter neighbors and pond-lovers from taking
that relaxing stroll or run around the pond on a summer Sunday."
Despite the law,
the pond has remained an illicit refuge from the heat for many in the area,
even earning a listing in "Let's Go" for being a popular place for midnight
skinny-dipping.
Julie Crockford,
the president of the Emerald Necklace Conservancy, said she would support
swimming in the pond, if the city hired lifeguards, set strict rules, and
improved the beach in the southwestern corner of what was a glacier until about
14,000 years ago. "I would say it would be a wonderful opportunity for
residents," she said. "I do know people who have swum there, and
nothing untoward happened to them."
Among the swimmers
is her daughter Kade, 24, who estimates that she has gone skinny-dipping in the
pond as many as 30 times over the past few years, usually late at night with
friends.
"It's
beautiful," she said. "It's really nice to be there at night, when no
one's around. It's really peaceful to swim in the center of the city."
Another night
swimmer, Sean Madsen, says he has taken the plunge more than a dozen times,
though "not as often as I should."
"It's like
jumping into a big pool," said Madsen, 24, a software developer from
Jamaica Plain. "You don't have to walk for a long time before it drops off
and you can swim. It's beautiful with all the city lights reflecting off the
water."
Stephanie Berry,
23, a preschool teacher, has blogged about her swims in the pond, which is
ungated. She remembers one night when the pond was so crowded with late-night
swimmers that she and her friends had a hard time finding their own secluded
spot.
"It feels
really great, especially when it's hot," she said. "I would like to
experience it during the day, rather than under the cloak of night." There
are day swimmers and not just those who have so-called accidents while renting
the sailboats and rowboats at the graceful century-old boathouse, which the
city restored in 1991.
For more than two
decades, Mark Adler, 57, a professor of mathematics at Brandeis University, has
evaded park rangers by doing his summer laps before 8 a.m., keeping close to
the tree-shaded shores.
"I swim in a
place discreetly hidden from the boathouse," he said. "The water's
very pleasant, very clean, a very nice temperature, which is why I swim there
and why others should be allowed to as well, provided it's controlled."
City officials say
the swimmers are encouraging dangerous behavior, which over the years has led
to multiple drownings, including DeAngela Fuller, 43, a Roxbury mother and an
experienced swimmer who died after taking a dip on a hot evening last July.
Toni Pollak,
commissioner of the Boston Parks and Recreation Department, acknowledged how
tempting it is to swim. But she said it would be too expensive to add enough
fill to level the submerged ground by the beach, which quickly drops to depths
of as much as 53 feet. She worries that swimmers would endanger local wildlife,
such as the snapping turtles, mallard ducks, and double-crested cormorants that
frequent the pond. Then there are the potential liability issues.
"As tempting
as it is, we do not allow swimming in Jamaica Pond," she said.
"It's really a public safety and wildlife preservation issue."
For 40 years, Gerry
Wright has helped preserve the pond's beauty as director of the Jamaica
Park/Olmsted Park Project, a citizens group that has pressured the city to
maintain the pond. He says allowing swimming to return would threaten the
delicate ecology, now in Zen-like balance, along the 1.5-mile trail surrounding
the water. He also worries more human interference could exacerbate what he
sees as the effects of global warming: algae blooms, eel grass, and other pond
scum.
"I would be
opposed to swimming every step of the way," Wright said. "Fully, I
grant that swimming is more than appropriate, but it would interfere with the
appreciation of the nature.
"This is the
city," he said. "It's not like Concord," where, at Walden Pond,
a similar "kettle hole" pond that is twice as deep, authorities have
found a way to balance preservation with swimming. But with the city under
pressure to provide more outdoor pools, some officials said they would be
willing to consider opening the pond to swimming.
Emily Tisei Moscol,
who spent eight years teaching sailing at the pond, worries that swimmers would
muddy the water. "It would become brackish and dirty with children and
adults using it as their bathtub," said Moscol, 28, of Dedham. "Not
allowing swimming is one way of actually preserving the pond."
Meira Levinson,
whose daughters have waded in up to their knees, frets about too much traffic
on local roads. But she argues that the joys of allowing swimming outweigh the
potential problems, which she considers manageable.
"Every time I
take my dog to swim in the pond in the summer, I think longingly of doing so
myself," said Levinson, 37, who lives off the Arborway in Jamaica Plain,
and is also breaking the law letting by letting her golden retriever frolic in
the water. "The opportunity to swim outdoors, in one's own neighborhood,
in fresh water, would be fantastic."
David
Abel can
be reached at dabel@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @davabel.