kent don't you know there is a difference between property ridge owners and property ridge owners with gunks FA from 50 & 60's

You have completely misread and misrepesented the point by assuming I care about them "peeping".

Indeed, I have. And your Big Brotherly suggestion was, I guess, props for mentoring?

Something major is brewing. Their post was a preemptive action regarding something that ythey have not yet disclosed.

Which post?

Chris, please illuminate for us how the contrasts are instructive.

Yorick-

Thanks for understanding that we’re just trying to be responsive to concerns that have been raised. I’ll happily sign responses in future, but they’re usually developed collaboratively anyway.

Due to staffing and time limitations, we’ll try to stay responsive, but will only be able to check in occasionally and respond to questions or issues raised by more than one posting.

Richard (drkodos) -

As to the landowner letter, we posted it since the Preserve is registered on Gunks.com and it just seemed easier than having one of the signers handle that. Sorry if that offended, but these are folks who have successfully done land trust transactions with the Preserve and their words still stand.

Debi Clifford, Communications Director

Kent,

I simply think its instructive to have as many informed voices and opinions represented here as possible, to question and measure responses from every side. In a best case scenario, this is an opportunity to create and participate in a kind of open-ended town meeting on ridge issues. The thing tends to boom with random, cogent shots across the bow followed by dribble. It's frustrating that we can't maintain a decent, cogent volley.

Thank you, Debi. While I think it's understood that the Preserve's responses are collaborative, having them signed by the writer(s) removes the distancing imprimatur that Mohonk Preserve engenders. It stops feeling like we're engaged with a monolith.

I am a new member, and poster. I've been encouraged by one of your long term members to come here be active since I am a property owner in Gardiner. As far as the Mohonk Preserve is concerned, I find that it has a very one-way relationship with the town of Gardiner and the people who live here. other than a "free" pass to hike there for one weekend a year, and an occasional bone thrown to our volunteer fire department, the preserve is all take and no give.

Hundreds of thousands of visitors go through there a year, stomping around the ridge. They pay little to no taxes to contribute to our roads or infrastructructure. If you really wanted to "preserve it", why not just close it off to all traffic?

Oh, and the GFD Womans Auxiliary is trying raise money for some new equipment. If you were really such a good neighbor, you'd donate the $700 they are trying to raise.

maybe I'm misinformed....so, prove me wrong.

I don't think you're going to find much support for the idea of closing the Gunks to traffic here.

Misinformed, possibly.

How do you propose to tax these visitors? Is it not enough that we already spend money at local businesses?

Did Kent encourage you to post?