Donald, you seem to have found them quite easily when you chose to maliciously malign them upthread. Now suddenly you can't find them.

Your line of questioning and reasoning doesn't seem to have much to do with understanding, only attacking, so I'm not going to waste my time.

From Kent "Regarding ownership of closed land, there are five pieces of land in the Near Trapps and the Bayards, now closed, that were open as a neighborly accommodation prior to April 2009. "

I suppose you could argue that the Preserve needs to build a path if it wants to cross over.




This is kind of silly isn't it? When we are talking about the boarder of a property at the edge of a cliff face such as has been first defined back 100 years ago, where since then rocks and dirt have annually built up and horizontally away from that said boarder, this means that as I walk now on that path today it is no longer over your property. And this is already obvious in most places.

Now, if one wanted to remove that gift that has fallen down to us from the heavens then they would need to remove all that debris down to where the original property line was back when it was first said, to make sure there is no ledges under there that dirt is not on etc. The rock in these arias is always falling off the cliff and that means that rock at the base is always marginal ground. The rock changes and ledges explode, I have seen it happen. If you want to split hairs you would need to get an mini-excavator and an archeologist up there. And regardless if you did that or not people have a right to walk the boarders of their property. How else could these lands be surveyed? You cannot not check the survey it at the top of the cliff, that's not where it happens, except in those cases where your property owners own the cliff, but even in some cases that is in dispute, the language is sometimes confusing.

To get right to the point of what I am saying, if you were to build a fence up there along the edge of the cliff, as you hammered the pipes down the fence would lean, and subsequently you would have to plant those posts at least 3' away from the edge of the cliff. And even if you put them right at the edge there would still be enough room in most places to walk between the fence and the cliff. As I understand it where there is a property line at "the edge of the cliff face" today I can walk across at high tide as I always have before.


But this really is not worth arguing about anyway, as far as people going to Bayards or going to these parts of the Near Trapps, there is nothing there to climb. The rock is always loose, and people can go around to where the rock is good, it makes little difference. But then again on second thougt, I think you and your neighbors are crating hazards to completely block off access knowing people are back there. In the case of some kind of stress or accident are you and your neighbors going to run up to the cliff and stand it the way of a rescue or someone looking for their lost child?


Ultimately what is being convened here is hate toward people, not hate for the Preserve, and your going to run up there to prove it? I hope this helps.

DJP

Donald, the property lines along the Nears and Bayards are almost all at the "high point of the land". Try again.

That's my point. Read my post again.

Can we start with your property specifically? How has the Kent property at Bayards been directly effected? I can see your property boarders the Preserve, so you reap great benefits knowing that you can sell your property 1000 years from now, and that there will not be a house on top of the ridge looking down on you. Perhaps you are confused? Where is your problem on the Kent property?

I'm calling you out Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association; I'm putting you on blast. Where are you, if you exist at all?, who are you, what are your names?, and what issues do you individually stand for against the Preserve? Speak now or forever hold your peace!



When I was a kid my Dad and Mom used to take my brother Dana, David, and I down to Barnegat bay to go fishing. We would catch a lot of fish, but most all were puffer fish. We would bring a cooler full of ice on a small boat, and my Dad would throw those puffers in, and when we got home my Mom would put some butter in a pan and cook them up, and we would eat them.

I have no idea what "Advocacy Group / Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association" is. But one thing is for sure, they don't stand behind what they believe, otherwise they would reveal their identities individually and be real on all levels. You know who I am; I have no alias name, you see my photograph there Ken. You see it there not because I am brave but because I believe in what I am saying and I stand behind what I say. You have someone to blame and you have responsibility here, and that is what this is all about. With that alias there's nothing, and it looks to me (and I am not alone in this) like a puffer fish. There is no group of angry neighbors. There may be one, two or three and some friends, but that's it. If someone really believes in what they say they will be willing to answer questions, they will not run and hide as they throw red herrings behind them. Your full of nothing but hot air when you cannot answer, that holds true for you especially … Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association.

Donald, they're not here. They're not here on gunks.com and never have been. It doesn't mean they don't exist.

I don't mean MPNA but the many neighbors who regard the Mohonk Preserve as a huge problem neighbor and who have never logged on to gunks.com

What your implying now is Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association is actually a hoax not only because "They're not here on gunks.com and never have been" but also because "... the many neighbors who regard the Mohonk Preserve as a huge problem neighbor and who have never logged on to gunks.com" are not represented in MPNA.

Can we start with your property specifically? How has the Kent property at Bayards been directly effected? I can see your property boarders the Preserve, so you reap great benefits knowing that you can sell your property 1000 years from now, and that there will not be a house on top of the ridge looking down on you. Perhaps you are confused? Where is your problem on the Kent property?

You haven't been paying attention have you?

Does anyone else think Donald's picture is...shall we say....interesting?

Can we start with your property specifically? How has the Kent property at Bayards been directly effected? I can see your property boarders the Preserve, so you reap great benefits knowing that you can sell your property 1000 years from now, and that there will not be a house on top of the ridge looking down on you. Perhaps you are confused? Where is your problem on the Kent property?