If you would like to support the MPNA, why not consider making a donation directly to that organization as well?

I know this is off-topic, but I'd like to take this time to formally reinforce my support of the Mohonk Preserve and the efforts it makes in environmental education and conservation.

I just made a donation of $50, designated to go specifically toward land acquisition. If you, too, would like to donate to the Mohonk Preserve, the link to do so is here:
https://web.memberclicks.com/...mop&formId=42439



On a quasi-related tangent, I'd like to point out that recreation is NOT the primary mission of the Mohonk Preserve.
"The Preserve's mission is to protect the Shawangunk Mountains by inspiring people to care for, enjoy, and explore the natural world."

To me, this means that climbing, hiking, cycling, strolling, riding, photographing, having picnics, etc., are encouraged to facilitate the development of our relationship with nature. Please consider that, when being asked as a climber or member of some other user group, to withhold your financial support, that such a request comes at the detriment of plants and animals who don't have the option to simply go somewhere else. The Shawangunk Ridge(and by association, the Preserve) is the only place available for them.

Our natural lands have all but disappeared, and the acreages protected by The Mohonk Preserve and other entities which do similar work are vitally important.

Let those who feel unjustly wronged with the Preserve's actions seek legal assistance and justice - I'd never suggest otherwise! But please don't seriously consider withholding donations which sustain the preserve.

If you would like to support the MPNA, why not consider making a donation directly to that organization as well?

There seems to be an inverse relationship between length of user name and ability to make cogent points.

Do you count spaces in that metric?

FWIW over on Gunks Kent posted up that he had dinner with the folks from the MPNA and they all had a good chuckle over the threads here and on Gunks.

EDIT- Oh, and between that post on Gunks and the fact that MPNA hasn't been back here since 8/5 I'm thinking this is possibly one of the best trolls here in quite a while.

The MPNA supports this kind of land acquisition when both parties are willing. However, there have been too many instances of strong arm tactics that have not made it to court and therefor there are no civil action #'s. We will supply a list of these as well.

Yes. Absolutely.

My point was more that Kent is apparently actively involved in whatever it is the MPNA is doing in spite of his claim to not be the user MPNA. As for the Association's actual legal standing, I have no idea, nor really care.

Adatesman,
The OP has original information, not previously known in this forum, that being the Mohonk Preserve is suing two of its neighbors currently. This info can be confirmed by anyone who cares to go to the Ulster County Clerk's office at 240 Fair Street in Kingston New York. It's on the second floor.

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

maybe some one can get information on said court cases. It costs money and as much as I would like to know I don't have money to spend looking at cases that don't effect me that much.

http://www.co.ulster.ny.us/...rk/courtrecords.html

According to what I found in a simple search, it listed 4 suits with MP as either Defendant or Plaintiff.
- First case, as Defendant against a particular party.
- Next 2 suits as Plaintiff against one member of the above party(along with another, related, name)

Those cases are disposed of.

- One active suit, as Plaintiff

MPNA says there is a recent case waiting an answer - why would that not be listed if the ones disposed of are? They take it off the records in that interim waiting an answer and then reenter the data?

Not that I really care. As many have noted, the OP and friends seem to enjoy employing obstinent obfuscation.

But how can one seriously suggest that four suits, since 2003, with 3 involving the same parties, is string-arm tactics against the general population of landowners in their vicinity?

Come ON, already, Kent et al. A lawyer who actually believed their client was in the right would JUMP at the chance to represent them and "slay the evil dragon called Mohonk." They'd work on a contingency fee and profit hugely - IF they thought they had a chance of winning.

I suppose you might reply with some insinuation the judges are in the MP pocket - a rather serious allegation.