markc
Jul 15, 2008, 8:07 PM
Post #76 of 76
(939 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
marc801 wrote: Just to clarify... the Gunks are on private land. I was speaking generally when I said people forget that when they complain about the fee. I don't know if that was the specific case with markc - he says it's not - yet he went on in his post to compare the Gunks with a bunch of areas on publicly owned land.
I started a much longer reply, which I've realized is utterly pointless. Some of us made comments equivalent to, "Gee, that's kind of spendy for a day-use pass." To me (and my occasionally distorted perception), the responses seem like, "OMFG! You're so damn cheap. Private land! Would you prefer condos?!? Trip to the movies without popcorn! Save the bunnies!" I'm suddenly a cheap dick and the spoiler of all that is right and good in the world.
In closing, I maintain that the day-use fee for the Gunks is more expensive than other places I've visited. I fully acknowledge that the Mohonk Preserve is working under a very different funding structure than public climbing areas, which can account for the price difference. This in no way implies that the climbing in the Gunks isn't worth the fee requested, or that the fee is in any way unfair. I'm sure it's a very nice place.
Sheesh.
|
