Originally Posted By: cfrac

The person who posts under the title Advocacy Group seems to have made the rights of private land owners the number one issue in their life and in doing so looks down upon all concepts of shared resources. When the Mohonk Preserve, an organization that shares its land, makes any decisions as to the use of its land the Advocacy Group person is upset, even if that action is one that would benefit that person's private land.

What is funny is that this Advocacy Group person continues to make their "private land" arguments to the visitors of Gunks.com, which in turn is a group of people that tend to be supportive of organizations that allow recreational pursuits to be enjoyed on their land. Then when someone contradicts them they react with antagonism as if they were expecting the audience, the group that overwhelmingly supports land preserves, to agree with them.

Well written cfrac.

Originally Posted By: Advocacy group
… We don't support many of the tactics that the Mohonk Preserve uses to acquire land. …


And if true, many of us, certainly me, wouldn't either!!!

But what you write is so sensationalized, one sided, and often incorrect, that I don't think many here take you seriously at all! The prescribed burn issue is a great example. Prescribed burns are generally accepted in the US, and are commonly used to reduce the risk of wild fires, yet you write as though they are increasing the risk to the Mohonks neighbors. When we see you insist on incorrect and sensationalized information, propaganda, we can't believe anything you write.


You might be publicizing an significant issue, but you are hurting your cause the way you have gone about it here