|
Lucas79
Oct 28, 2011, 5:31 AM
Post #76 of 102
(10110 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 26, 2011
Posts: 7
|
I still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that there aren't any happy hours in Massachusetts.....
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Oct 28, 2011, 1:08 PM
Post #77 of 102
(10084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
Lucas79 wrote: I still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that there aren't any happy hours in Massachusetts.....
Davis Square: Johnny D's, most weekdays from something like 5pm to 630pm (again, verify). Two-for-one apps (one big enough to make an entree) and good drinks.
The food there is MUCH better than people realize.
I never cared about happy hour, but they're all over the place, particularly where the students are (i.e. - Harvard / Porter / Davis Square and in the Fens).
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 28, 2011, 2:27 PM
Post #78 of 102
(10068 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
Gmburns2000 wrote: Lucas79 wrote: I still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that there aren't any happy hours in Massachusetts..... Davis Square: Johnny D's, most weekdays from something like 5pm to 630pm (again, verify). Two-for-one apps (one big enough to make an entree) and good drinks. The food there is MUCH better than people realize. I never cared about happy hour, but they're all over the place, particularly where the students are (i.e. - Harvard / Porter / Davis Square and in the Fens).
Grendels, Harvard Square. Half price food, as long as you spend $3 on drinks. 5:00-7:30 & 9-11:30, or something like that.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 28, 2011, 2:31 PM
Post #79 of 102
(10066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
Lucas79 wrote: I understand the differences between state, federal, and privately owned land. In this case the PRIVATE landowners are charging way to much. I'm not going to beat this dead horse anymore. We all know that climbing at the Gunks is way more expensive than everywhere else. If I lived in NYC I'd take your advice and buy an annual pass. Living in Boston I doubt I'd get my moneys worth, having the white mountains, the Adirondacks, and trips to indian creek and yosemite planned. I'll probably get to the Gunks 3 or 4 times, pay the daily fees, and continue sobbing about how expensive it is. Thanks to those of you who gave me some level headed responses though. I purposely haven't attacked anyone or anything. I've simply presented my case like an adult.....as I'd expect other adults to do as well. Cheers
Also, if you were to purchase the family membership for 2 people, it cost $115.00. That is just under 7 day passes. Split between 2 people, you only need to go 3-4 days to pay for it. A family is defined by same "household."
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Oct 28, 2011, 2:50 PM
Post #80 of 102
(10061 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: Lucas79 wrote: I understand the differences between state, federal, and privately owned land. In this case the PRIVATE landowners are charging way to much. I'm not going to beat this dead horse anymore. We all know that climbing at the Gunks is way more expensive than everywhere else. If I lived in NYC I'd take your advice and buy an annual pass. Living in Boston I doubt I'd get my moneys worth, having the white mountains, the Adirondacks, and trips to indian creek and yosemite planned. I'll probably get to the Gunks 3 or 4 times, pay the daily fees, and continue sobbing about how expensive it is. Thanks to those of you who gave me some level headed responses though. I purposely haven't attacked anyone or anything. I've simply presented my case like an adult.....as I'd expect other adults to do as well. Cheers Also, if you were to purchase the family membership for 2 people, it cost $115.00. That is just under 7 day passes. Split between 2 people, you only need to go 3-4 days to pay for it. A family is defined by same "household." Josh
Are you looking for a new housemate?
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Oct 29, 2011, 5:59 PM
Post #81 of 102
(10026 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
Why are you guys trying to convince this Colorado dude that he's wrong? If he thinks he's right he will go away, and we wont have to have people around who have preconveived notions of people and a ridiculous sense of entitlement. I'm happy he thinks it is too expensive to climb in the Gunks. See ya bud. Don't the the Thruway tool booth kick you in the ass on the way out of town!
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Oct 29, 2011, 7:03 PM
Post #82 of 102
(10022 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
rangerrob wrote: ... we wont have to have people around who have preconveived notions of people and a ridiculous sense of entitlement.
And the Gunks will be empty.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Oct 29, 2011, 7:57 PM
Post #83 of 102
(10017 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
rangerrob wrote: Why are you guys trying to convince this Colorado dude that he's wrong? If he thinks he's right he will go away, and we wont have to have people around who have preconveived notions of people and a ridiculous sense of entitlement. I'm happy he thinks it is too expensive to climb in the Gunks. See ya bud. Don't the the Thruway tool booth kick you in the ass on the way out of town!
Don't sweat it. This is a guy who likes to complain and feels he's always getting shafted, for example:
Lucas79 wrote: I still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that there aren't any happy hours in Massachusetts.....
Judging by the immediate rebukes, he doesn't do the basic research that living in a new city entails too well, either.
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 28, 2012, 6:03 PM
Post #84 of 102
(9841 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
A few items for context. The Mohonk Preserve exec director makes $140k or so a year, and they have a multi-million dollar visitor center, and a multi-million dollar annual revenue stream.
They are no doubt about preservation. They are also about money. Lots of it.
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jan 29, 2012, 1:13 AM
Post #85 of 102
(9803 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
funnelator wrote: A few items for context. The Mohonk Preserve exec director makes $140k or so a year, and they have a multi-million dollar visitor center, and a multi-million dollar annual revenue stream. They are no doubt about preservation. They are also about money. Lots of it.
Seems about right for the typical 501c non-profit. Actually the $140K might be a little on the low side.
[From: http://www.charitywatch.org/hottopics/Top25.html ]
Harold Varmus, M.D., Past President/CEO Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
$2,557,403
John R. Seffrin, CEO American Cancer Society
$2,222,272
Includes $1.5 million in a retention benefit approved in 2001, "to preserve management stability."
Edward J. Benz, Jr., M.D., President/CEO
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Jimmy Fund
$1,252,705
Robert J. Mazzuca, Chief Scout Executive Boy Scouts of America - N.O.
$1,211,572
Thomas C. Nelson, Past Ex-Officio/Past COO AARP Foundation & AARP, respectively
$1,176,614
Includes a separation payment of $682,285. The full amount of Thomas Nelson's compensation was paid by AARP, not AARP Foundation.
Edwin J. Feulner, Jr., President Heritage Foundation
$1,098,612
Harry Johns, President/CEO Alzheimer's Association - N.O.
$1,065,524
Includes $392,218 retirement and other deferred compensation.
Ernest Allen, President/CEO National Center for Missing & Exploited Children
$1,057,604
Includes $432,542 retirement and other deferred compensation, of which $338,953 is a catch-up amount for underfunded retirement benefits in previous years.
Gail McGovern, President/CEO American Red Cross
$1,032,022
Includes a one-time reimbursement of $473,570 for relocation costs to work at the national headquarters.
Wayne LaPierre, Executive VP/Ex-Officio National Rifle Association & Foundation, respectively
$970,588
Christopher DeMuth, Past President American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
$939,059
Includes $528,972 in supplemental executive retirement plan payments.
Steven E. Sanderson, President/CEO Wildlife Conservation Society
$927,534
Michael L. Lomax, President/CEO United Negro College Fund (UNCF/The College Fund)
$877,582
Includes $686,080 in retirement funds for 5 full years of service.
Joseph V. Haggerty, COO
United Way Worldwide
$864,875
Includes $318,578 SERP imputed income.
Jonathan W. Simons, M.D., President/CEO
Prostate Cancer Foundation
$850,188
James E. Williams, Jr., President/CEO Easter Seals
$833,000
Alan J. Lewis, Past President/CEO Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International
$813,732
Joseph Krajbich, M.D., Orthopaedic Surgeon Shriners Hospitals for Children
$807,917
Includes $401,435 retirement and other deferred compensation.
William E. Evans, Director/CEO St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/ALSAC
$795,538
Robert J. Beall, President/CEO Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
$760,446
Rabbi Marvin Hier, President/CEO Simon Wiesenthal Center
$759,026
Howard Rieger, President/CEO Jewish Federations of North America
$707,454
Shulamith Bahat, Past Associate Executive Director American Jewish Committee
$706,563
Includes $530,798 deferred compensation and retirement payments in respect to 50 weeks salary and accrued vacation.
Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, President
International Fellowship of Christians & Jews
$702,417
Abraham H. Foxman, National Director Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith
$689,398
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 29, 2012, 2:49 PM
Post #86 of 102
(9756 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
There are roughly one million 501c3s in the country. You list the top 25 executive director compensation packages, or the top .0025%, to support your claim that 140k for the exec director of the Mohonk Preserve is somehow typical.
What kind of drugs are you on?
Many land preserves have no visitor center, no staff, no executive director. Access is free and considered part of their egalitarian mission. Donations are entirely voluntary.
Not so the Mohonk Preserve. Access is funneled to a few choke points where rangers stand guard and collect money. To be sure, a season pass for climbing is very economical, but for a family of four passing through, and wanting to stop and maybe go for a walk around undercliff overcliff or just watch people climbing, the cost is ridiculous.
(This post was edited by funnelator on Jan 29, 2012, 3:32 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jan 30, 2012, 2:53 AM
Post #87 of 102
(9704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
funnelator wrote: Many land preserves have no visitor center, no staff, no executive director. Access is free and considered part of their egalitarian mission. Donations are entirely voluntary...
Many land preserves also do not pick up trash, remove graffitti, maintain roads and trails, conduct climatological research, collect data on populations of native flora/fauna, educate the public on ecological matters, etc...
I guess you get what you pay for.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 30, 2012, 3:20 PM
Post #88 of 102
(9677 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
Those other more humble land preserves are not overflowing with trash nor are they festooned with graffiti. At the bigger ones research and education are done in collaboration with universities.
One need not have a multi-million dollar budget, multi-million dollar visitor center, and $140K a year executive director to accomplish these things.
The Mohonk Preserve closed off access from the hairpin turn, the overlook, and the pull off just beneath the Uberfall. All so they could funnel visitors to two main access points to be sure to collect every dollar of the mandatory fee. Fees should be voluntary. Many people voluntarily donate a lot of money above and beyond the access fee or annual membership. Why not let everyone voluntarily decide at what level they want to contribute?
Aggressively collecting every dollar possible is indicative of the unfortunate rapacious and mercenary character of the preserve these days.
(This post was edited by funnelator on Jan 30, 2012, 3:21 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
sp115
Jan 30, 2012, 4:26 PM
Post #89 of 102
(9664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 515
|
Funnelator, are the other land trusts you mention similar to the Gunks, in terms of having climbing as a core activity that gets managed and supported?
Btw, I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious and don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 30, 2012, 4:53 PM
Post #90 of 102
(9655 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
Among private land preserves, as far as I know the gunks are unique in that they have so much climbable terrain.
But access to climbing terrain doesn't require a multi-million dollar budget, multi-million dollar visitor center, and $140k executive director. There are many climbing venues on private and public land across the country that don't have any of that.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Jan 30, 2012, 5:24 PM
Post #91 of 102
(9640 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
Yep, and each and every one of them sees maybe a thousandth of the traffic that the Gunks sees. I'm glad you have such a robust faith in humanity that you honestly think voluntary fees would support even a single ranger. If there weren't idiots like you, our nation's teachers would have nothing to do with their time.
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 30, 2012, 5:32 PM
Post #92 of 102
(9636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
Are you saying you wouldn't contribute money to the Preserve if you didn't have to? That's not very nice of you.
Many climbers contribute money far beyond what the Preserve requires them to. It doesn't seem like much of a reach to let everyone voluntarily contribute what they feel is appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 30, 2012, 5:58 PM
Post #93 of 102
(9628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
funnelator wrote: Are you saying you wouldn't contribute money to the Preserve if you didn't have to? That's not very nice of you. Many climbers contribute money far beyond what the Preserve requires them to. It doesn't seem like much of a reach to let everyone voluntarily contribute what they feel is appropriate.
I know quite a few climbers who (like you I suppose) are vocal about feeling that it is wrong to charge for use of "public" land. They also climb a bunch at the Gunks, and they only pay because they are either shamed by their peers or because it would be a pain in the ass to have to sneak in.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt, if they had an optional donation, they wouldn't pay a cent.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 30, 2012, 6:14 PM
Post #94 of 102
(9621 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
GO, I have contributed to the preserve way beyond what is required. I have many personal friends who do the same. That said the preserve just doesn't need the wealthy trappings they have.
And they don't need to charge your average family of two adults and two teens $48 to go for a walk.
The aggressive approach to collecting, having, and spending money changes the character of the place, and not for the better.
As you have called my personal willingness to pay at public areas into question, when I travel nationally and internationally, I pay whatever fee is required and have never complained about doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jan 30, 2012, 6:35 PM
Post #95 of 102
(9617 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
funnelator wrote: GO, I have contributed to the preserve way beyond what is required. I have many personal friends who do the same. That said the preserve just doesn't need the wealthy trappings they have.
Recall that it was constructed from a special fund drive with donations specifically for the VC. IOW, the paying members of the Preserve *wanted* the VC. BTW, it's all the other users of the Preserve, not climbers, that are the true deep pockets in Preserve donations.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 30, 2012, 6:49 PM
Post #96 of 102
(9613 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
funnelator wrote: GO, I have contributed to the preserve way beyond what is required. I have many personal friends who do the same. That said the preserve just doesn't need the wealthy trappings they have. And they don't need to charge your average family of two adults and two teens $48 to go for a walk. The aggressive approach to collecting, having, and spending money changes the character of the place, and not for the better. As you have called my personal willingness to pay at public areas into question, when I travel nationally and internationally, I pay whatever fee is required and have never complained about doing so.
And what I'm telling you is that if you think most climbers are so generous, you are seriously deluded.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Jan 30, 2012, 9:47 PM
Post #97 of 102
(9578 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
funnelator wrote: Are you saying you wouldn't contribute money to the Preserve if you didn't have to? That's not very nice of you. Many climbers contribute money far beyond what the Preserve requires them to. It doesn't seem like much of a reach to let everyone voluntarily contribute what they feel is appropriate.
You don't see me reaching for my wallet, do you?
Maybe those excessive contributions allowed the Preserve to expand beyond its means, so, just to keep everything running at the level those excessive contributions instigated, they had to increase access fees.
I can guarantee that if people think they can get in without paying, they will.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jan 30, 2012, 11:39 PM
Post #98 of 102
(9560 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
funnelator wrote: GO, I have contributed to the preserve way beyond what is required. I have many personal friends who do the same...
As have I, being a life member.
funnelator wrote: That said the preserve just doesn't need the wealthy trappings they have...
It would seem that one man's "wealthy trappings" are simply another man's desirable infrastructure.
Curt
(This post was edited by curt on Jan 30, 2012, 11:40 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jan 31, 2012, 1:40 PM
Post #99 of 102
(9519 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
In reply to: And what I'm telling you is that if you think most climbers are so generous, you are seriously deluded.
In reply to: I can guarantee that if people think they can get in without paying, they will.
I guess you guys are right. Considering your remarks about climbers not contributing to the Preserve unless forced, and the recent bouts of trespassing, tree cuttting on the preserve to facilitate climbling, recent extensive bolting despite the tradition of not bolting here, etc, there are just too many selfish and disrespectful asshole climbers at the gunks for this to be a chill place any more. It's too bad though.
(This post was edited by funnelator on Jan 31, 2012, 1:41 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jan 31, 2012, 3:01 PM
Post #100 of 102
(9504 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
funnelator wrote: In reply to: And what I'm telling you is that if you think most climbers are so generous, you are seriously deluded. In reply to: I can guarantee that if people think they can get in without paying, they will. I guess you guys are right. Considering your remarks about climbers not contributing to the Preserve unless forced, and the recent bouts of trespassing, tree cuttting on the preserve to facilitate climbling, recent extensive bolting despite the tradition of not bolting here, etc, there are just too many selfish and disrespectful asshole climbers at the gunks for this to be a chill place any more. It's too bad though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
