Back in March the BMC basically told everyone to stay indoors to avoid any risk of injury that could put undue pressure on a struggling NHS. Basically from mid-March to mid-May, it was seen as morally iffy (and against BMC guidance) to do anything at all. National Parks were closed, logbooks were suspended and the best you could do was go for a bike ride or a walk round the block.
It seems now that the health services in some areas are creaking under at least similar, if not worse pressures. Are we going to be in a similar boat? The weather usually curtails a lot of climbing for me between December and February (outside some low-grade winter romping up in Scotland or Wales), but I will really miss the occasional weekend of local sport climbing or bouldering if it's not allowed.
I'm really hoping that the guidance will be along the lines of 'stay local, climb within your ability, use sound judgement, etc.'
Define local !
The Government did this time - "within your village, town or part of city".
Which clearly means getting in the car and driving to the Peak as a definite no, even if you're quite near to it.
Does it though?
Under travel it says:
● outdoor exercise.Thisshouldbedonelocallywherever possible, but you can travel a short distance within your area to do so if necessary (for example, to access an open space)
Living on the west side of Sheffield with Burbage North only 7 miles away that implies to me that accessing that open space is permissible for me
Actually make that 6.2 miles!
The Peak is not out of bounds for Shark, it is Derbyshire that is out of bounds. Burbage North and South are within the Sheffield city boundary https://www.alamy.com/road-sign-showing-that-the-sheffield-city-boundary-extends-well-into-the-surrounding-moorland-of-burbage-moor-yorkshire-england-uk-image216502491.html
Not sure about Burbage West but WSS is too hard for Shark anyway
Now whether 7 miles fits within "but you can travel a short distance" is open to debate.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand we are back again.
Caveats for locality are there for rare exceptions and not the rule. If your only means of exercise is a park across your road that happens to be in a different council ward then you shouldn't be breaking any rules by going there. That sentence is not there so everyone in Sheffield can drive to Stanage.
That's the problem with these rules and guidance having loopholes. It would be much better if they went hard on the rules, no exceptions, and if any extenuating circumstances need to be considered have an appeal process afterwards. As soon as you put 'wherever possible' etc. in the fine print then people start to manipulate the wording to meet their personal opinion or circumstances.
That's a choice our government made.
I'd be amazed if new BMC advice isn't coming very soon but trying to solve government communication problems isn't within their remit. Stay local and take care is what I expect.
> Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand we are back again.
> Caveats for locality are there for rare exceptions and not the rule. If your only means of exercise is a park across your road that happens to be in a different council ward then you shouldn't be breaking any rules by going there. That sentence is not there so everyone in Sheffield can drive to Stanage.
And it’s also a rare exception that a major city borders a national park and it is nonsense to deny access especially when part of it falls within the city limits.
Surely the question is: Do you have to travel all the way to Burbage to exercise when there are plenty of open spaces on the way to walk, run or cycle?
There may be some clarification on the guidance later today - the you can exercise but not engage in recreation/leisure has been queried
> Does it though?
> Under travel it says:
> ● outdoor exercise.Thisshouldbedonelocallywherever possible, but you can travel a short distance within your area to do so if necessary (for example, to access an open space)
> Living on the west side of Sheffield with Burbage North only 7 miles away that implies to me that accessing that open space is permissible for me
If you've got no open space more 'local' to exercise in then fill your. But we both know that isn't true. Exercise is excepted, recreation and leisure isn't.
I'll add with an edit: you can guarantee that Burbage is going to be not very original choice for a lot of people doing what they think they're allowed to do. What's that thing? You're not stuck in traffic...
> If you've got no open space more 'local' to exercise in then fill your. But we both know that isn't true. Exercise is excepted, recreation and leisure isn't.
Accepted or excepted ?
I regard Climbing primarily as exercise and outdoor climbing is my primary exercise. I am in the fortunate position to be able to do it locally. The nearest venue to do it in my local area is Burbage.
But exercise is excepted even if it is recreation and leisure. If I'm only allowed to run laps of my local park I'd rather sit here and rot.
Back to people interpreting the guidance as meaning you must not have fun and asserting deontological absolutism with complete disregard to the underlying principles of not spreading the virus whilst preserving mental and physical health
Absobloodylutely - though I did have to look up ‘deontological absolutism’
Everyone else - thanks for making my blood boil -I just did a power pull-ups PB 👍🏻
I think there are two approaches to the lockdown guidance which will divide people into two groups:
- those that will take the guidance literally and if it doesn't say you can't do something then that is a green light to go ahead
- those that take the guidance more holistically and if it doesn't say you can do something then they won't do it
One of these approaches may well help contain the spread of the virus, help to avoid unnecessary accidents, help the NHS etc, the other may lead to additional spread of the virus, unnecessary accidents and stresses on NHS etc.
A time to do what we should be doing, not what we want to be doing.
Personally I want to take advantage of the local conditions at the moment and explore some rare lake district ice climbing, but I'm not going to as that would be selfish, potentially putting myself and others at risk and not in the spirit of the guidance / law. I would see this not as exercise but as pursuing a hobby / interest, exercise is going for a walk or a run, which I will be doing, locally of course.
> Accepted or excepted ?
Typo - exercise is accepted.
> I regard Climbing primarily as exercise and outdoor climbing is my primary exercise. I am in the fortunate position to be able to do it locally. The nearest venue to do it in my local area is Burbage.
Then you've a skewed view of what the 'stay at home' message is. Plus you're not exactly shy of climbing related exercise at home are you to scratch that particular itch? Pretty extensive setup by all accounts.
Scotland seem to be a lot clearer on their exercise/recreation rules:
"local outdoor recreation, sport or exercise, walking, cycling, golf, or running that starts and finishes at the same place (which can be up to 5 miles from the boundary of your local authority area) as long as you abide by the rules on meeting other households"
> But exercise is excepted even if it is recreation and leisure. If I'm only allowed to run laps of my local park I'd rather sit here and rot.
You have an option to locally exercise but don't want to. That's your choice.
> Back to people interpreting the guidance as meaning you must not have fun and asserting deontological absolutism with complete disregard to the underlying principles of not spreading the virus whilst preserving mental and physical health
And we're back to 67 million people interpreting that the guidance makes their circumstance exceptional. Your just pissed off because your flavour of fun might have to be something different for a while.
Why should the BMC need to rule on this? Surely the guidance and from tomorrow legislation from the Government is what matters? Hopefully the Govt will be clearer than last year and rely on effective legislation rather than faith in the public's sense of responsibility.
I live less than 6 miles from Wharncliffe but the intervening countryside and woodland offer me better and safer exercise opportunities than solitary bouldering would at Wharny, as would local road bike rides when things thaw out a bit
> Back to people interpreting the guidance as meaning you must not have fun and asserting deontological absolutism with complete disregard to the underlying principles of not spreading the virus whilst preserving mental and physical health
I don't see the point of quibbling about what the guidance says. It's a lockdown, you're supposed to stay at home as much as possible. If you can justify to yourself doing whatever, do it, don't f*ck it up, and keep quiet about it. Or follow the spirit of the rules and stay at home, exercising at/from home. It's a personal choice.
> Back in March the BMC basically told everyone to stay indoors to avoid any risk of injury that could put undue pressure on a struggling NHS.
The moral 'iffyness' of climbing back then was also based on the possibility of the virus being passed on hand-to-hand through shared contact with holds etc., which we now know to be much less of a thing than we thought at the time, so there's that.
> It seems now that the health services in some areas are creaking under at least similar, if not worse pressures.
Worse, I think, significantly so.
A good friend of mine is a YAS paramedic, currently self-isolating after a colleague's positive test last week. Her joking-not-joking advice when we talked about a little diy project I was doing after I dropped a few bits of shopping round the other day was for f*cks sake to make sure I didn't need an ambulance for the foreseeable future. They're seriously struggling to maintain the service she says, much more so than earlier in the year.
Because the government are not going to go into detail on climbing specifically. If you're allowed to 'take part in recreational activity locally' then I can go juggle multi-pitch death choss 3 miles from my front door.
The BMC provides a collective voice and guidance for climbers. No, they're not the law and I know a lot of people couldn't care less what they say but it is definitely handy to have an 'authority' to provide advice and guidance specific to my activity.
People can argue whatever which way they like about the wording from the government as it isn't specific enough. As soon as the BMC come out and say 'no climbing' for example, there's no more interpreting the guidance to meet your own desires.
> The moral 'iffyness' of climbing back then was also based on the possibility of the virus being passed on hand-to-hand through shared contact with holds etc., which we now know to be much less of a think than we thought at the time, so there's that.
Is it known that the new strain isn't more of an issue that way?
> And we're back to 67 million people interpreting that the guidance makes their circumstance exceptional.
Nobody is saying they are exceptional. As long as their interpretation is defensible and, most crucially, doesn't bring them in to contact with other people and so potentially spread the virus (which is precisely the point of the whole damned thing*), what is the problem?
*Some people seem to get so wound up about exact wording and so on that they forget this!
> Is it known that the new strain isn't more of an issue that way?
I thiiink so, but really not sure tbh. My (lack of) understanding is that the mutation is to do with how the virus gets into a cell, not how it gets into your body.
> The moral 'iffyness' of climbing back then was also based on the possibility of the virus being passed on hand-to-hand through shared contact with holds etc., which we now know to be much less of a think than we thought at the time, so there's that.
I think it was known quite early on that the chance of transmission on outside climbing holds was very slim. It wasn't particularly hard to find places to climb where I would be the only person there. For me it was definitely not wanting to be that dickhead with the broken ankle, taking up a bed/ambulance/doctor at the same time that ICU was overflowing and they were building emergency hospitals.
Scotland with its clear guidance and permissible distance, and Wales saying exercise should begin and end at your home seem to have been able to be much clearer than England don't they?
I reckon if you have to ask then it's probably not within the rules, or at the very least, within the spirit of the rules.
Getting in the car and driving a few miles to somewhere to go bouldering or climbing? Probably not really what they were intending is it?
But then at the same time, if you do do that you're probably not putting yourself, or anyone else at great risk. Strain on the NHS from bouldering and climbing injuries is likely to be negligible and have no tangible effect on their ability to deal with the current crisis (though you will certainly take up space in A+E) so I don't think it's worth getting worked up about if a few people do it. Wouldn't be the same decision I would have made, but I can't see the worth in condemning people for coming to a different conclusion to me when they're not really doing any harm.
I'm sure the BMC will change their guidance, but frankly if people are going to ignore rules put out by the govt. (or at least stretch and bend them!) then I can't see what difference the BMC guidance change will have?
> Nobody is saying they are exceptional. As long as their interpretation is defensible and, most crucially, doesn't bring them in to contact with other people and so potentially spread the virus (which is precisely the point of the whole damned thing*), what is the problem?
Personally, I've got essentially zero worries about spreading the virus. But I am anxious about the small risk of needing medical care, from something that could happen driving (given the conditions), winter hillwalking or bouldering. Personally, while I like winter walking, bouldering in the freezing cold just isn't fun enough to outweigh the risk. Maybe at some stage in the lockdown, I'll get in the car to enjoy the outdoors. Maybe I won't. But I won't be pretending that it's anything other than me breaking the lockdown because I personally judge the risk to be acceptable, and bugger the rules. I definitely won't be coming out in public to say that I'm not doing anything wrong.
> Nobody is saying they are exceptional. As long as their interpretation is defensible and, most crucially, doesn't bring them in to contact with other people and so potentially spread the virus (which is precisely the point of the whole damned thing*), what is the problem?
> *Some people seem to get so wound up exact wording and so on that they forget this!
Because we've gone beyond 'not potentially spreading the virus'. That's baked in now and by all accounts it could be a shit show. We'll know in 10-14 days time. This lockdown is to prevent the possible failure of the health service to cope now and after that point.
I think we're getting a little away from the main angle of the thread. This isn't about risk of transmission as much as it is about taking part in activities which present an unnecessary risk to one's health and whether the BMC will go hard on it's advice about this.
Travelling from England to Scotland to go winter climbing now is obviously a prickish move, as there is a good risk of coming into contact with others in shops, petrol stations, etc. as well as a risk of injury, requiring MR teams and medical services having to come into contact with someone from another area. It's also towards the dangerous end of the discipline spectrum, so you're increasing the risk of putting a strain on the NHS (who have a full quota of poorly people).
Where clarity would be useful is whether someone who lives at the foot of a mountain should go ice climbing. They're not spreading the virus as such and are within the government guidelines but are still increasing the chances of putting a strain on the NHS.
When people see Mr Shark bouldering at Burbage, they don't know his circumstances. All they see is someone bouldering at Burbage. That makes everyone else think that it's more okay and start to manipulate wording to suit themselves. Mr Smith from East Sheffield now thinks it is more acceptable because he 'only lives 12 miles from Burbage'. Then Ms Doe from Doncaster doesn't want to lose her recent gainz and is less than an hour drive away, so acceptable in her eyes.
> Scotland with its clear guidance and permissible distance.
It is not very clear at all. Yes, there is a maximum limit of your couincil boundary plus 5 miles, but within that you are meant to stay "local" and not travel further than necessary to reach an "uncrowded area". Seems sensible but certainly still very much open to interpretation.
Everything's open to interpretation if you try hard enough Scotland have at least try to qualify "local".
> Where clarity would be useful is whether someone who lives at the foot of a mountain should go ice climbing. They're not spreading the virus as such and are within the government guidelines but are still increasing the chances of putting a strain on the NHS.
Have you not just provided exactly the clarity you are asking for? I'm not telling anyone that they're a terrible person for breaking the rules, just urging them to be honest* about what they're doing. And at a practical level level, if you're going to break the rules, be discreet!
Why do we need the bleedin' BMC to tell us what to do, especially when it's so obvious?
*edit: with themselves, don't be honest on here!
You'll never get the BMC to say it's ok to walk from your house and go ice climbing while in a 3rd lockdown.
My take on 'personal responsibility' bearing in mind my Mrs is in the NHS and former colleagues in the Fire Service are doing shifts in the morgue is don't do anything you have no full control over...ie I've got black trails near me for mtbing on...during the last lock down I thought I'd lay of the high octane stuff and bide my time...
I got out and still had a blast....do we need to have rules for everything?
> When people see Mr Shark bouldering at Burbage, they don't know his circumstances. All they see is someone bouldering at Burbage. That makes everyone else think that it's more okay and start to manipulate wording to suit themselves.
How would they see me unless they were already there? 🤣
I also worry that non-climbers who see me climbing will take up the sport as it is a very dangerous activity you know
But risk is a personal judgement and therein lies the problem.
"There's more chance of ending up in hospital on a bike ride than there is climbing"
"I've been soloing grit edges for 30 years and never had an accident. I don't need the BMC to tell me what is safe"
"It's only sport climbing so it's safe"
"I'll only climb well-protected trad"
"It's only top-roping"
etc.
The fact of the matter is that the more people do it, the more it is deemed acceptable and there is ALWAYS an unnecessary risk, whether you like it or not.
I'm just struggling to get into the mindset of someone who sees the PM (albeit Boris Johnson) say "stay at home", who then says to themselves "that means I can go climbing" and then when the BMC says "you can't go climbing" then says "oh, really, I can't go climbing? I won't then, thanks for clearing that up".
Really? When someone says 'exercise locally' that could mean any number of things to me, including walking or cycling to nearby crags. Before the BMC changed it's guidance last time and UKC suspended the logbooks, the local honeypot sport crags were still being hit on the reg.
The vast majority of people don't live next to the crag (I do, but a shit one) and I don't see why those that really are that local can't make their own minds up. Sure, if you need someone else to decide for you...
> Why do we need the bleedin' BMC to tell us what to do, especially when it's so obvious?
We don't. I generally enjoy debunking the romantic myth that "back in the day" all climbers were daredevil anarchic rule-breaking individualists - but wanting more guidance about the guidance about the rules does seem to be rather unduly deferential and abdicating personal responsibility. The BMC hasn't exactly distinguished itself in the communication department of late either.
Haver you been to a bouldering wall in the past 5 years? It's far from the counter-culture.
I disagree, its communication on Covid has been pretty good.
> Haver you been to a bouldering wall in the past 5 years? It's far from the counter-culture.
I assumed me saying I enjoyed debunking the climbers as anarchists myth indicated I don't think of climbing as being much more counter-culture than trainspotting. Every so often I work at my local wall so I feel reasonably well informed about the culture of the sport.
The original BMC guidance was issued at a time when people were taking to the hills in large numbers and the government had not yet issued its own clear guidance. While the government dithered the BMC stepped up. We now have a firm directive from the government, which is to stay at home. You can only leave home for strictly limited purposes, and "you should always stay local in the village, town, or part of the city where you live". Exercise "should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area." The rules do allow you to travel a little further to access open space, but this is clearly intended to allow people to visit a park when they don't have one locally. I suggest that whilst that might permit you to access open space on the edge of the city, it does not allow you to drive for several miles through open countryside in order to reach a specific spot.
It is not us you have to persuade, but the police. I doubt they would be receptive to the argument that climbing is the only form of exercise you are able to undertake, or that a 7 mile journey is "staying local". Still, it's only £200 for a first offence.
I don't really need BMC guidance, the government guidance for me is reasonably clear. There are specific circumstances in my life where I will operate within the spirit of the guidance and others where it is quite clear. All this BMC stuff seems to get the members here so fired up, no idea why.
Pfft, a mouse fart would result in a 150 post thread these days....
I don't really want to get involved in the debate as it is essentially just two entrenched sides repeating the same arguments ad infinitum, but I think it's important to point out that, for some, not being able to partake in their chosen form of exercise is an unnecessary risk to their health. And I don't think many who have never been in that position will truly appreciate that.
Just a thought to keep in mind.
> I disagree, its communication on Covid has been pretty good.
It's been much clearer on Covid I accept. In fact I wish they'd been less black and white when it came to insisting on the 72 hour rule for huts! But it was the leadership and corporate governance issues I had primarily in mind.
Latest from the BMC:
https://thebmc.co.uk/covid19-latest-national-lockdown-in-england
While it's shit for people who can't get out and go climbing it does not help them one jot if those that can access crags locally lock themselves inside and also have a miserable time.
If you can have a grand day out and adventure within the rules during these bleak times please do. It will make me insanely jealous but it also make my heart sing to think someone at least is getting out (you lucky bastards).
Take care folks and be kind to each other.
Choosing not to access local (but cold and damp) crags does not mean having to be locked up having a miserable time. Other exercise activities including walking, running, cycling are available and arguably more rewarding at this time of year, and also more effective in maintaining the general health and wellbeing that was behind the medical advise on which the Government's regulations are based, as opposed to say crimp strength or being able to latch a wicked sloper.
> While it's shit for people who can't get out and go climbing it does not help them one jot if those that can access crags locally lock themselves inside and also have a miserable time.
> If you can have a grand day out and adventure within the rules during these bleak times please do. It will make me insanely jealous but it also make my heart sing to think someone at least is getting out (you lucky bastards).
> Take care folks and be kind to each other.
> I don't see the point of quibbling about what the guidance says. It's a lockdown, you're supposed to stay at home as much as possible. If you can justify to yourself doing whatever, do it, don't f*ck it up, and keep quiet about it. Or follow the spirit of the rules and stay at home, exercising at/from home. It's a personal choice.
just bumping this ^^^^^
> for some, not being able to partake in their chosen form of exercise is an unnecessary risk to their health.
Very few, I suspect. Most people can adapt to changing circumstances if they have to and anyone that obsessed with climbing will have tended to have moved near to climbing.
Even obsessive climbers have to adapt to long term injury, after all.
"arguably more rewarding at this time of year", for you maybe, but not necessarily for others. Personally I'd be delighted if you had a grand day out walking or biking (I hate running so that will never delight me).
Round here, right now, it's clag in every direction so I'd put these things in the category "possible type 2 fun and only rewarding in terms of the sufferage endured".
> If you can have a grand day out and adventure within the rules during these bleak times please do. It will make me insanely jealous but it also make my heart sing to think someone at least is getting out (you lucky bastards).
just bumping this ^^^^^
> I'm just struggling to get into the mindset of someone who sees the PM (albeit Boris Johnson) say "stay at home", who then says to themselves "that means I can go climbing" and then when the BMC says "you can't go climbing" then says "oh, really, I can't go climbing? I won't then, thanks for clearing that up".
Well the message 'Stay at home' immediately contradicts itself by saying unless you are doing x y or z. And how anyone has anything less than completely contempt for Johnson for the continued mishandling of just about everything is beyond me. Also I have no clue what the BMC's opinion has to do with any of this. Do they have some expertise in epidemiology now?
To me there are two very obvious things we need to do. Not getting and not spreading Covid and not getting injured. Driving 5 miles or driving 10 miles makes no difference if you don't interact with anyone and are just outside (excepting not driving in dangerous conditions).
Personally from the start of the pandemic the only real risk I've been concerned about is seeing my son after school. I've dropped him outside school and it's total chaos, loads of kids wandering about in big groups with very few masks in sight. The buses are meant to be socially distanced with one person per seat but he tells me it's business as usual with everyone packed in like sardines.
I've also spoken to a friend who travels by train and he said there are now loads of people who don't wear masks there either. Once time he saw a ticket guard tell someone they had to wear a mask and the guy physically attacked him. It's this kind of thing that is fuelling the pandemic not going climbing on safe routes on deserted crags.
> I've also spoken to a friend who travels by train and he said there are now loads of people who don't wear masks there either. Once time he saw a ticket guard tell someone they had to wear a mask and the guy physically attacked him. It's this kind of thing that is fuelling the pandemic not going climbing on safe routes on deserted crags.
Exactly that!
> Driving 5 miles or driving 10 miles makes no difference if you don't interact with anyone and are just outside (excepting not driving in dangerous conditions).
Except your chances of having a traffic collision is doubled. If you are travelling to your job as a key worker, then fine but if you are driving to a crag then I wouldn't consider that 'essential travel'.
There are over 150,000 road traffic casualties a year, so everyone driving about does make a difference to the emergency services.
> Well the message 'Stay at home' immediately contradicts itself by saying unless you are doing x y or z.
I don't think that's a contradiction.
> It's this kind of thing that is fuelling the pandemic not going climbing on safe routes on deserted crags.
I don't think that climbing is remotely significant, but of course it would be significant for the individual if it went wrong. The question was about quibbling with the rules and asking the BMC to adjudicate. I'm not going to have a go at anyone for what they decide to do, that would be hypocritical for starters. But if I decide to get in the car to go bouldering, I'm not going to start looking for loopholes to justify that it's within the rules - it blatantly isn't!
Since this all kicked off and we were released from the 1st lockdown I've climbed outdoors. I've never felt at risk from catching covid. Going food shopping and work is where I'm more at risk. I've always worn a mask at work and shopping to reduce risk.
The new rules state local, my very local government area is classed as leek East and upper hulme. That's the roaches, ramshaw etc. I have no doubt a 5 minute drive is local. I'm happy that local for me contains outdoor climbing. I won't be venturing further.
Climbing is exercise, I don't feel I have to justify what I'm doing as it's well within the new laws
You ever seen anyone pull off a can of beans and deck, break their ankles, kill their mate at the bottom of the isle?
> Since this all kicked off and we were released from the 1st lockdown I've climbed outdoors. I've never felt at risk from catching covid. Going food shopping and work is where I'm more at risk. I've always worn a mask at work and shopping to reduce risk.
> The new rules state local, my very local government area is classed as leek East and upper hulme. That's the roaches, ramshaw etc. I have no doubt a 5 minute drive is local. I'm happy that local for me contains outdoor climbing. I won't be venturing further.
> Climbing is exercise, I don't feel I have to justify what I'm doing as it's well within the new laws
Why not walk....instead of driving for 5mins?
Not sure if you've seen the main road in question (A53 Leek to Buxton) but I'd consider walking along that a significant;ly greater hazard than anything else discussed so far on this forum!
In reply to
> Not sure if you've seen the main road in question (A53 Leek to Buxton) but I'd consider walking along that a significant;ly greater hazard than anything else
Ironic, that it's safer to drive than walk then climb.
Yeah this was a worry of mine.. However my mate who worked in hospital said the majority of the patients they got, during 1st lockdown, taking up the beds were ones doing DIY at home... Loads of eye injuries and hand injuries.... So I guess staying at home is just as risky. I can't build a shelf for shit but I can pad out a landing like a pro
Safer driving.
Yes it's a fine line to tread. I've heard from people working in the local hospital that they're really quiet but I guess it only takes a moment for that to suddenly change with exponential growth and if everyone starts getting out climbing in areas with lower covid levels then it sets a precident for others in areas which may not have such low levels.
Part of me hopes that the weather makes the decision for me because I'm really conflicted.
Cheers...I was under the impression this next lock down we were back to exercising from home.
Driving to exercise...👍
I can see no problem with you cycling/walking to boulder discreetly and away from public attention.
The pertinent bit to this discussion is around 2:20 which clear identifies the behaviour that is at fault and doesn't get anywhere remotely near to implicating someone travelling locally to go climbing on their own or with one other person.
While I presume this clip was posted to support the "don't go climbing" angle, it clearly doesn't.
> thanks for making my blood boil -I just did a power pull-ups PB
> The pertinent bit to this discussion is around 2:20 which clear identifies the behaviour that is at fault and doesn't get anywhere remotely near to implicating someone people travelling locally to go climbing on their own or with one other person.
> While I presume this clip was posted to support the "don't go climbing" angle, it clearly doesn't.
You're wrong. It was to counter the "I heard from the friend of a friend that hospitals are quiet".
Folk are all justifying whatever they want to; that's up to them. My personal take is that 1 in 50 people has the virus right now and the next month will be ugly, vaccine or not. Every time you meet someone other than from the house you live in, no matter how briefly, you increase R a little bit. Idiotic behaviour increases it more of course, but the cumulative effect matters.
Exercise is important - but it should be the lowest R exercise. Time we grasped the spirit more than the letter or the legal status. As I say - that's my take, but most folk think otherwise and I'm not going to change their minds. So the link was just to address one of the things that is demonstrably wrong - and, more than factually incorrect, these "rumours" are disingenuous, disheartening and disrespectful of folk working in hospitals.
However, I wouldn’t begrudge anyone doing a 5 minute journey to their local crag, climbing well within their grade, and keeping a low profile. It might not be within the spirit of the guidance but it’s hardly a major issue, particularly if it’s done discretely.
Climbers are not really the problem, we should be directing our anger at the real idiots who continue to travel long distances, have house party’s, organise vaccine protests...
> Exercise is important - but it should be the lowest R exercise.
In all seriousness, going for a climb at a quiet crag is probably going to be "lower R" than going to a city public park full of people. Cycling alone is probably the lowest R, though might have a high risk of accidents while it's icy.
> Climbers are not really the problem, we should be directing our anger at the real idiots who continue to travel long distances, have house party’s, organise vaccine protests...
...go round their Nan's for a cup of tea...
It's the ordinary stuff that's mostly spreading it.
-->It was to counter the "I heard from the friend of a friend that hospitals are quiet"
Ok, I understand, apologies for misunderstanding, low R - no argument here.
Why did you even start this thread? This just seems like a Trojan horse post so you can pass judgement down on all and people have bitten. This subject has been done to death and the outcome the same. Some will play by the rules and others will ignore them..
The way I see it exercise is exercise, there is nothing either said or implied in the rules that you must restrict the form that exercise takes, only that you're limited to doing it with no more than one other person outside your household. So if you're a runner, run, cyclist cycle, climber climb. Simple really. If you have to travel to access your chosen sport then so be it.
If they wanted to stop travel simply say "do not go outside a 10 mile radius of your house for exercise" job done, no way around it.
Not that I really see what difference traveling makes anyways, cars don't transmit covid, what difference does it make if you go for a 5 mile walk around your local hills or a 5 mile walk around some similar hills 30 mins drive away? You're not going to be anywhere near anyone in either scenario. And please, spare me the risk of breakdown/car accents nonsense, if you're considering the possibility of death and injury every time you get in the car then you probably shouldn't be driving. And unless I've missed something about the mass covid deaths within the ranks of the RAC etc then I really doubt breakdowns have had any real effect on cases at all..
> If they wanted to stop travel simply say "do not go outside a 10 mile radius of your house for exercise" job done, no way around it.
That is, for all intents and purposes, what they have said ... "avoiding travelling outside of your village, town or the part of a city where you live".
As I'm sure has been said in this thread already: if one is to put all other arguments aside (even the logically sound ones) and just follow the rules, it seems that you can only go to the crag if it literally is in the village, town, or part of city that you live in.
> Not that I really see what difference traveling makes anyways, cars don't transmit covid, what difference does it make if you go for a 5 mile walk around your local hills or a 5 mile walk around some similar hills 30 mins drive away? You're not going to be anywhere near anyone in either scenario. And please, spare me the risk of breakdown/car accents nonsense, if you're considering the possibility of death and injury every time you get in the car then you probably shouldn't be driving. And unless I've missed something about the mass covid deaths within the ranks of the RAC etc then I really doubt breakdowns have had any real effect on cases at all..
It's gone beyond about not spreading the virus (1:30 infection rate in London. 1:50-130+ in various other parts of the country). What is possibly going to happen in 10 - 14 days and counting, is baked in. We can't row back from that. That's why lockdown has happened and areas very rapidly ramped up from T2 to T4 overnight.
It's significant that in previous lockdown or similar measures there have been a few days notice. This one was given with four hours notice. Anything that can be done to stop an utter shit show happening in hospitals and to the poor sods working in them, should be done.
If you're lucky enough to have a hill on your doorstep, count your blessings. If not, then maybe think about something else to do more local.
BBC News - Covid: England's third national lockdown legally comes into force
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55554550
That overlooks the fact that not everybody lives in a village, town or part of a city
> Why did you even start this thread? This just seems like a Trojan horse post so you can pass judgement down on all and people have bitten.
Quite. In the OP he said he hoped that the BMC would issue guidance along the lines of 'stay local, climb within your ability, use sound judgement, etc.' then subsequently went on to dictate that you shouldn’t and can’t climb locally.
> Burbage North and South are within the Sheffield city boundar
Although the guidance - plain as day - says “your part of city”.
I’m sure we can look forwards to hundreds of posts arguing back and forth on interpreting the guidance and law.
What ever anyone does, I don’t recommend ending up in need of medical attention. Take it easy, be a bit more mindful etc.
> That overlooks the fact that not everybody lives in a village, town or part of a city
So your postal address doesn't have a village, town or area on it?
> (replying to Paul Jepson)
> Quite. In the OP he said he hoped that the BMC would issue guidance along the lines of 'stay local, climb within your ability, use sound judgement, etc.' then subsequently went on to dictate that you shouldn’t and can’t climb locally.
In all honesty Shark if someone said to me 'pop to your local shop' if I then get in my car to drive (what was it, 6.25 miles?) passing plenty of shops on the way because I like this shop but not those shops, then it's not local.
Burbage might be your nearest crag but you're stretching what the guidance, which became law this morning, intends. That is stay at home. Exceptions for local exercise and other requirements. The Police were at Fairholmes yesterday turning people away (this according to Ladybower Facebook).
It's not about not spreading the virus now. Xmas being too relaxed seems to have tipped the balance unfavourably. The NHS is under a very real threat of not coping.
If the worst that happens is that people miss a couple of months of climbing or whatever your predilection, then I'll happily stand for the told you so's if we're wrong. The alternative of a broken NHS isn't where I want to be.
As I said, I'm quite conflicted on it, which is why a representative body having a standpoint is helpful. I know that's hard for a lot of independently-minded climbers to get their noggin around but having a general consensus from the climbing community is a positive for me.
I started the thread as a genuine question, this being the first time since the initial lockdown (when the BMC first issued guidance) that there is concern for the emergency services being overrun. I'm sorry if it's riled anyone, I wasn't having a good day yesterday (first day back at work and needed a distraction).
There are hundreds of adventurous trad routes within 3 miles of my front door, as well as a good number of sport routes on oft-questionable rock. I'm not going to be jumping on them because they're well into the unnecessary risk category in my opinion. There are also several options within my locality that I deem safe as houses (low-level traverses with flat landings etc. with very little chance of anyone else being there) which I'll have to consider.
Id also urge everyone here to follow the guidelines but what individuals do is on their conscience. However climbers being especially virtuous simply doesn't scratch the surface of what this paramedic reports:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/06/covid-crisis-paramedics-nhs-overstretched
Too many people don't take mask use seriously indoors and are meeting people from other households indoors and workplaces are too often not as covid safe as they could be. This virus spreads indoors not on a crag in winter.
> Id also urge everyone here to follow the guidelines but what individuals do is on their conscience. However climbers being especially virtuous simply doesn't scratch the surface of what this paramedic reports:
> Too many people don't take mask use seriously indoors and are meeting people from other households indoors and workplaces are too often not as covid safe as they could be. This virus spreads indoors not on a crag in winter.
And none of what you say I disagree with, except maybe the virtuous comment. I'm not claiming anyone needs to be a saint about this, in fact I've said multiple times if you've got a crag on your doorstep then good on you. But some people wanting to drive to Burbage because it's in their city but needing a six or seven mile journey?
It's about collectively making a decision which does no detriment to the NHS and associated workers but at an individual level. Just because some people are making shitty decisions doesn't excuse us from making other shitty decisions (god knows I've seen plenty of that on my street).
> in fact I've said multiple times if you've got a crag on your doorstep then good on you. But some people wanting to drive to Burbage because it's in their city but needing a six or seven mile journey?
> It's about collectively making a decision which does no detriment to the NHS and associated workers but at an individual level. Just because some people are making shitty decisions doesn't excuse us from making other shitty decisions (god knows I've seen plenty of that on my street).
Good grief. A short journey to do some solitary distanced bouldering is of no detriment to to the NHS and associated workers.
Driving in your car for 10/15 minutes to a crag has no greater risk of transmission than walking 10/15 minutes to a crag.
It is not a shitty decision to climb if what you are doing has no or negligible risk of transmission or accident.
> Good grief. A short journey to do some solitary distanced bouldering is of no detriment to to the NHS and associated workers.
> Driving in your car for 10/15 minutes to a crag has no greater risk of transmission than walking 10/15 minutes to a crag.
> It is not a shitty decision to climb if what you are doing has no or negligible risk of transmission or accident.
And all seems eminently reasonable. Until you factor in that you will not be the only one making that same self apparently appropriate decision. Multiply that a few times and that's when it could unravel. Low percentage of big numbers... And I'll repeat, it's not about transmission rates in the absolute terms. That boot has fallen. This is about mitigating any need for hospital admission.
Do you remember one of the very early threads on lockdown no:1 sometime in March 2020? Lots of the same opinion about it not being a risk etc? The very next day there was that very protracted rescue in Wales (Cwm Silyn?). The numbers are stacking up to be worse than last Spring.
Bell Hagg is much closer to your house
I've never been to Bell Hagg, but have always been curious. Now I'm even more so...
I'd be delighted if Bell Hagg were next door to me (unlike the Ruffs). Go visit.
I'll add it to the list as/when springtime comes around
It was the 1st crag that I went to when I moved to Sheffield. I lived near Goodwin sports centre, had no car so got the 51 bus up to the golf course. It's okay when your previous local crag was Causey Quarry.
> I'd be delighted if Bell Hagg were next door to me (unlike the Ruffs). Go visit.
Ooof. It's my local too. Think I'd forgive anyone driving to Burbage to forgo climbing here!
I wrote a long and considered reply to this last night — but the Internet said no and it was lost in the ether. I agree, it's a small minority for whom that is the case, but those people do exist, and I felt it important to voice that. If I hadn't been able to climb in 2012, I almost certainly wouldn't be here to be making the argument.
My personal opinion is that if everyone did what they felt was right, and everyone avoided judging others based on scant facts for doing things that appear contrary, the world would be a much happier place.
> My personal opinion is that if everyone did what they felt was right, and everyone avoided judging others based on scant facts for doing things that appear contrary, the world would be a much happier place.
Happier for some, but not all, lifeboat men called out for this?
https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/st-ives-lifeguard-rock-climbers-4859218
Yet cycling was deemed to be acceptable and we had an early summer of almost daily MRT call outs to fallen MTB'ers in the Peak...
Cycling and MTBing are two rather different pursuits; the only thing they have in common is the involvement of a bicycle and helmet. Cycling on roads and flat trails is reasonably safe. Proper MTBing has a terrible accident record and is probably very ill-advised at the moment.
Right now I’m not convinced, just been to the shop and came very close to ending up on my ar*e, this was walking, skinny road tyres seem pretty scary right about now.
Yes, quite, same could be said for hard trad and low level easy bouldering too
> Yet cycling was deemed to be acceptable and we had an early summer of almost daily MRT call outs to fallen MTB'ers in the Peak...
Then I hope people get the message to stay local this time so you're not inconvenienced. That and knock it on the head.
Which one do you want me to choose the village or town?
The fact is that I don't live in either.
Maybe I should choose the one that allows me the greatest range, or maybe I shouldn't choose either seeing as they are both outside the county and parish that I actually live in which is used to calculate the local Covid level?
Surelly it isn't hard to understand that the definition doesn't work if you don't live within a town, village or city!
> Right now I’m not convinced, just been to the shop and came very close to ending up on my ar*e, this was walking, skinny road tyres seem pretty scary right about now.
Yeah, if it's icey that would need reconsidering.
> Yes, quite, same could be said for hard trad and low level easy bouldering too
If you live very near the crag, probably, yes.
It's guidance, it's not law, you don't have to interpret the minutea of it, just follow its ethos. It's essentially a set of examples to give you an idea of what "local" means.
If you live in the middle of nowhere and it's not safe to exercise directly from home (e.g. perhaps you live on a busy road with no pavement), head to the quietest reasonably nearby safe place to exercise, such as perhaps parking up by the end of a public footpath and walking off down there. But don't go jump a train to London to walk round Hyde Park or along the South Bank.
Is it just guidance? thought they could hand out fines now for traveling out of local area.
I can walk to Windgather from my house but I won't be climbing for a few reasons. Firstly the walk is the exercise, secondly I don't think it's in the spirit or ethos of the guidance. Thirdly I wouldn't want anyone to see me and think that's OK I'll do the same and lastly its a risk that I shouldn't be taking. Anyone suggesting that they climb and are safe at lower grades are fools. Years back when I climbed fairly well both my partner and I were competent at an E2 onsight lead but it didn't prevent him coming off a VS at Windgather one day and fracturing his leg. The local hospitals in Macc and Stockport are overwhelmed as it is, it's simple....walk, run or cycle a loop local to you. There was actually a guy up on shining tor at the weekend who was trying to justify paragliding off the ridge as it was 'his exercise'!!!
So it is just guidance then, serious question, i don't watch the news.
> Is it just guidance? thought they could hand out fines now for traveling out of local area.
Yes. Same as March.
The guidance would sort of be used, though, in determining if you were out of your house for a valid reason. I suspect they would not consider you had left the house for exercise if you were driving 3 hours to the Peak for half an hour's walk, as the primary activity there isn't a walk.
> Which one do you want me to choose the village or town?
> The fact is that I don't live in either.
> Maybe I should choose the one that allows me the greatest range, or maybe I shouldn't choose either seeing as they are both outside the county and parish that I actually live in which is used to calculate the local Covid level?
> Surelly it isn't hard to understand that the definition doesn't work if you don't live within a town, village or city!
I don’t know why you’re having a hissy fit about it. You’ve just said you live in a parish. There’s your answer! Don’t go too far from that!
The NPCC guidance for police does not mention travel at all. Seems the police do not have any interest in how far you have travelled, as long as you've left the house for one of the prescribed reasons.
https://beta.college.police.uk/guidance/covid-19-restrictions
> So it is just guidance then, serious question, i don't watch the news.
What does it matter if it’s guidance or law? You’re being asked to do your bit in the fight against this virus.
If it's guidance then can you be fined? Seems like it should be law.
You just don't see the irony of that call out in terms of what tehmarks wrote. It seems the climbers were fine, did not need a rescue and we have no idea if they were in breach of regulations, but someone called out the Coastguard so they had to check. Its way too unclear to make judgements.
For everyone falling off a climb and getting hurt right now there will be thousands who break limbs slipping on ice or tripping on their daily walk, run or cycle. Thousands will injure themselves falling down the stairs. The link is about accidents in the US but hopefully it makes the point.
https://in.reuters.com/article/us-health-injuries-stairs-idINKBN1CE1Z4
You make your choice and its good to advise others to take care on behalf of the NHS but please don't lecture others they can't carefully exercise on local rocks within the guidelines.
Met Police rep on the BBC news just now said the real problem they face is a large number of illegal events indoors that will be a high covid spreading risk. In terms of daily excercise people are urged to be responsible with travel and although the strict locality issue is a guideline people should be responsible.
> The NPCC guidance for police does not mention travel at all. Seems the police do not have any interest in how far you have travelled, as long as you've left the house for one of the prescribed reasons.
The Times reports that the Met Police will be taking a hard line with breaches.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/met-police-take-hard-line-on-covid-rule-breakers-rl2mn52j3
I dare say other forces will do the same. Since the fundamental rule is to stay at home as much as possible, anyone found outside the home can expect to be stopped and questioned.
Only a few months ago, when the situation was more under control and guidance was less restrictive, I was prepared to take a more pragmatic approach to low-risk activities in areas with few other people around. However we are now in an even worse situation than last March, with numbers of infections and deaths rising rapidly, a new and far more infectious strain of the virus running rampant, and the NHS on the verge of collapse. It is incumbent on all of us to pull together for the sake of society as a whole, to try to keep the lid on this until enough people have been vaccinated and we can start to return to normal. If everyone decides for themselves that their own actions can be justified, despite going against government guidance, this won't happen. Why think that would be limited to climbers?
It gives me no pleasure to say this, my family has been shielding and apart from essential shopping and very local solo walks I've hardly been out for months. My last climb was over a year ago. I miss it, and I miss my mates. But the figures show that lockdowns work. Unless we sacrifice a few weeks now (when anyway a lot of the time the weather will be crap) we stand to lose far more of the climbing season later in the year. That's without the minor point of saving lives.
> For everyone falling off a climb and getting hurt right now there will be thousands who break limbs slipping on ice or tripping on their daily walk, run or cycle. Thousands will injure themselves falling down the stairs.
I've had three potentially serious accidents in the last year. Two evenings ago I went flying on a flat icy path ten minutes walk from my house and luckily got away with a bruised arse (still hobbling around a bit). Last spring during the first lockdown I went flying backwards down my stairs when my fingerboard became detached from the wall and again luckily got away with only bruises. Also last spring I fell off my bike when a pedal broke off cycling the eight miles home from my nearest hill and got away with cuts and grazes that had me hobbling for a couple of weeks (I absolutely HATE cycling, but it was against guidance to drive there). In the same time I have done absolutely loads of hillwalking and climbing without incident
This coming weekend I plan to drive legally and in the spirit of the guidance to some reasonably near hills and go hillwalking.
> I dare say other forces will do the same. Since the fundamental rule is to stay at home as much as possible, anyone found outside the home can expect to be stopped and questioned.
I very much doubt that. There are a lot of people out for various reasons, stopping everyone will be impractical.
What they are changing is how quickly they issue a fine, I believe.
Crikey. Always make sure fingerboards are mounted properly - I recall a case of someone being paralysed from the neck down due to a failed pull up bar not so long ago.
> Crikey. Always make sure fingerboards are mounted properly - I recall a case of someone being paralysed from the neck down due to a failed pull up bar not so long ago.
Indeed. DIY and bike maintenance are, to put it mildly, not my strong points and obviously represent a real health and safety issue for me. On the other hand I am a very experienced and safe climber (though, of course, I know that accidents can always happen - recognising risks is the most important first step to managing them).
I am simply commenting about poorly worded advice.
You're in for one hell of a shock when you encounter someone having a genuine "hissy fit"!
I'm not suggesting they will stop and question everyone. But there is a greater liklihood that you might be asked to explain yourself. Throughout the police have preferred to explain rather than enforce, so except in the most egregious cases you can probably expect no more than a talking to.
Nevertheless, if the police happen to be driving past Burbage Bridge, for example, and see a load of parked cars it seems possible to me that they might take an interest. Especially if it's a nice day and they fancy stretching their legs.
Again the guy from the Met on the BBC news implied they very busy dealing with dangerous illegal indoor gatherings and would be applying advice to minor guidance breaches.
Part of the reason Derbyshire police got into trouble (unfairly in my view)was despite talking to people sensibly the problems were growing so they advertised (no name and shame nor penalties). They don't have time for a nice stroll at parking venues unless dealing with public complaints (many of which are 'think of the children' style time wasting).
The situation is incredibly serious but there is no need to throw all proportionality out of the window. We are where we are because people are ignoring rules on meeting indoors in private, much more serious than multiple obvious failures to follow 'hands face space' indoors in public. The only serious breaches I'm aware of that are really high risk amongst my friends are meeting indoors, completely against the rules.
> Its way too unclear to make judgements.
Leaving Covid related rules/regulations/guidance etc., on one side it's plenty clear enough to judge that those climbers had made what you might call a 'dick move' isn't it? Lockdown or no lockdown.
> Again the guy from the Met on the BBC news implied they very busy dealing with dangerous illegal indoor gatherings and would be applying advice to minor guidance breaches.
haven't we all got a part to play in this?
> You just don't see the irony of that call out in terms of what tehmarks wrote. It seems the climbers were fine, did not need a rescue and we have no idea if they were in breach of regulations, but someone called out the Coastguard so they had to check. Its way too unclear to make judgements.
You don't seem to understand, they may have quite possibly been within the guidelines of course, but because of their actions, they had to have interaction with someone else, one of the emergency services.
This is exactly the point, guidelines or no guidelines they've put extra strain on a system that doesn't need it.
We all know staying home is best, don't we?
> For everyone falling off a climb and getting hurt right now there will be thousands who break limbs slipping on ice or tripping on their daily walk, run or cycle. Thousands will injure themselves falling down the stairs. The link is about accidents in the US but hopefully it makes the point.
So what? I one more, one more too many, or is one more just fine?
> Part of the reason Derbyshire police got into trouble..
Sigh. Their drone footage shaming (though you're half right, not naming) people is still up on Twitter for anyone to see.
You're insisting that this was totally fine, not an overreaction at all. Also it's totally fine to go climbing now, because we mustn't "throw proportionality out the window".
I've attached a still from the video - the 'overcrowded' car park at Curbar Gap. And here's where the vid itself can still be found.
https://twitter.com/DerbysPolice/status/1243168931503882241
Trigger warning: One of the captions in the film contains offensive language (they use the word "Peaks").
Hmm.. some introspection may be called for here. On some unconscious level, perhaps the reason I was so offended by this appalling film isn't quite exactly what I thought it was.
The drone footage needs the content of the time to be fairly discussed: that we didn't know then (especially from later BLM protests) that proximity was less of a concern outdoors than it might have been, nor that surface contact was much lower risk than expected. In the end they were trying to avoid further waste of police time and to get the guidance message out. People at Curbar gap were spoken to first and only the non-locals were advised; the police were only there based on complaints from locals.
Whilst we are on the subject of misinformation 'Peaks' must be acceptable terminology given the tribe the Peak District was named after came from living in an area of peaks. I feel a bit like Canute in front of a rising tide on this and may well suffer the same maligned fate. The difference is the tide rises based on physics... the modern world is going mad and truth is becoming blurred.
I wonder if the new strain spreads more easily outdoors and may change this view, i.e. that it may be sensible to start crossing the road to avoid people again?
What interaction? If you mean the call out forced the lifeboat crew to interact I'd agree but we don't know who called them out or why.
To be clear I'd fully support the Iifeboat service putting out a video reminding people to take extra care with guideance so they don't need to face unnecessary call outs. For that reason there is no way I'd be climbing on a seacliffe in such circumstances, even if I lived nest door. Yet some people are free to make other choices within guideance and the real problem is illegal mixing indoors and failure in hands face space indoors in public, work and transport.
I was near to a rescue of a pair of friends avalanched on the Ben that was called out on UKC as a 'dick move'. Luckily someone else was caught out in an accident earlier so MR was already there (I think the accident was an MR member), it's very likely one of them would have died without the fast arrival. The accidents happened because a weather and avalanche forecast which was very good in climbing terns very early am had changed by late morning. I was climbing the icefalls in the gulph above the CIC hut and lucky not to be an inadvertant accident victim myself (as soon as snow came we got off and out as fast as we could).
On other occasions on the Ben people were climbing Ledge Route with an avalanche forecast that should have meant no one went anywhere near No5. It's not just themselves they risked it was MR if they had to search any accident debris in a high risk zone.
What constitutes dick moves is relative, so I'll reserve judgement for now.
> we didn't know then that proximity was less of a concern outdoors than it might have been
The advice was 2m+. The individuals and family groups in their film are dozen of metres from each other.
> the police were only there based on complaints from locals.
I was driving a van making supermarket deliveries during lockdown #1, and my round covered the nice leafy suburbs of West Sheffield, the densely populated and somewhat deprived housing estates of Lowedges and the Gleadless Valley, and a chunk of the Peak encompassing Baslow, Froggatt, Curbar, Hathersage etc..
A lot of people were having a hard time, almost all of them were being remarkably stoical about it and frankly it was a privilege to be able to take their shopping to them. A few people were having a bit of a whinge. Without exception the ones having a bit of a whinge weren't the ones confined to their pokey flats. The one who most springs to mind was in Froggatt, funnily enough, working from home with no loss of income from a huge house with a massive garden and a panoramic view. He particularly sticks in my mind because he was also the only person who refused permission to back the van up his driveway so I had to make three return trips between the gate and his front door with a sack barrow.
The point of all this?
Having the police act so publicly on your completely unfounded concerns is just another form of privilege as far as I can see. Just try getting them to attend if you live in one of those pokey flats in Lowedges in response to a complaint about something that is apparently causing you distress for no good reason whatsoever and is, quite frankly, none of your beeswax.
The same busybodies will undoubtedly call the police if they spot someone climbing up at Curbar some time next week. I look forward to your Schroedingers' support (and condemnation) of both sides simultaneously if the Derbyshire Rural Crime unit decide once again that they have nothing better to do than humour the callers.
> 'Peaks'
> I feel a bit like Canute
Yes, I feel you're a bit of a Cnut too. It was, of course, a joke. Sorry, I just couldn't resist.
Edit to add in reply to a later post:
> What constitutes dick moves is relative, so I'll reserve judgement for now.
Odd, you didn't reserve judgement for people caught out by bad weather at the Snake Pass summit, you were absolutely certain that every last one of them was an absolute bellend the second you'd read the news report and were straight on here to tell us so.
With or without a pandemic I thought it was good practice (and manners) for sea cliff climbers to let the coastguard know if they're doing anything that might result in a call from concerned members of the public.
I'm not an experienced sea cliff climber, so maybe I'm mistaken. As an experienced sea kayaker though I can tell you that the coastguard are friendly and approachable and very much appreciate a call (on their non-emergency number obvs) to let them know.
> I've attached a still from the video - the 'overcrowded' car park at Curbar Gap. And here's where the vid itself can still be found.
I don't think they claimed it was overcrowded, rather just that ther cars shouldn't have been there under the rules at the time. I think the point is that, if nobody stuck to the rules, carparks could have been very overcrowded with possibly considerable risk (as it was at leat thougt at the time).
The guidance in Scotland sensibly says you can drive to your nearest uncrowded area for exercise and recreation. I think this means I could (or even should) responsibly drive to the nearer parts of the Higlands rather than my local hills of the Lomonds and Ochils because for many people these will be the only legally accessible hills whereas my home location gives me more legal options - driving further might help avoid overcrowding of parking more locally.
That made me smile. Walking east from my house, crossing Porchester Road is the most dangerous part of the walk. One of those narrow urban arterial routes with a too narrow pavement with near constant speeding traffic and dumb overtaking manoeuvres when people slow to turn left into residential roads. In particular watching cyclists regularly get cut up makes me shudder.
I agree on the local privleges point and the whinging but that's whataboutery. I like the metaphor of Schrödinger's support as I think its apposite when balancing potentially interconnected unknowns in risk and morality, especially back then. We just don't know until it pans out.
Cnut made me smile as well... even if you do seem a bit worryingly obsessed with me.
I still think facing complaints, arguably wasting time better used on more egregious breaches and having talked to the people breaching guidelines without issueing penalties it was a reasonable police response and was their business. It's my opinion and clearly not yours.
> That is, for all intents and purposes, what they have said ... "avoiding travelling outside of your village, town or the part of a city where you live".
No, the guidance says:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home#exercising
"You should minimise time spent outside your home, but you can leave your home to exercise. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area."
So I'd agree travelling halfway across the country would be outside of that guidance. But as far as exercise goes, I'd consider my local area to be around a 20-mile radius of my house. Within that area are all the places I'd consider my local venues such as hills, cycling routes and climbing venues etc. But I do live in a rural area so things are spread out quite a bit. For others, it might be different, if you live in a city with a lot more packed in then your local parks, local skate park and local footpaths might be within a 2-mile radius of your house.
That is why I suspect they haven't given a set miles distance because they know things differ for different people.
Besides, I could walk up a hill directly from my house but as it's on the edge of town so can several thousand other people meaning that and many other local footpaths are quite busy at the moment. So from a covid spreading risk perspective, I'd much rather take a minimal extra risk of travelling further afield and walk in isolation than take my chances on busy paths near home.
> I don't think they claimed it was overcrowded
To be fair they didn't, no. I was quoting another tweet of theirs in that thread:
"We saw last week where such places in Derbyshire and other parts of the country became dangerously overcrowded, making social distancing extremely hard"
There were indeed some fairly ludicrous scenes the previous week at various honeypots. That was in the last few days before the 'lockdown' came into effect and I think it was everyone's 'last gasp' attempt to visit places beforehand. I snuck out for a twilight paddle around Ladybower reservoir (a rare treat - venturing onto the water there would normally be inviting a load of abuse) and saw for myself, at a distance, signs of the mayhem that there had been. (Not a soul anywhere near my secret socially-distanced launching spot, fortunately.)
There were scenes of overcrowding a few times later in the summer too of course, and a couple of times when Boris helpfully gave everyone a few days notice of when urgent and desperately needed restrictions would be belatedly coming into effect.
Personally, I don't think it helped Derbyshire Police at all in their efforts to deal with those genuine, serious problems that they had so blown their credibility by 'crying wolf' earlier in the year.
Under "leaving home":
If you do leave home for a permitted reason, you should always stay local - unless it is necessary to go further, for example to go to work. Stay local means stay in the village, town, or part of the city where you live.
That was under Exercise too at one point, though, I think it's being updated as they go.
> you do seem a bit worryingly obsessed with me.
You get right on my tits at times to be sure, but don't flatter yourself. We just happen to react to the same topics. You're the one who keeps dragging up this 'Derbyshire police' shite over and over again, a few days ago in a new thread you started literally entitled "Derbyshire police again" ffs.
> To be clear I'd fully support the Iifeboat service putting out a video reminding people to take extra care with guideance so they don't need to face unnecessary call outs.
shouldn't this be common sense? Why should they need to make a video?
> For that reason there is no way I'd be climbing on a seacliffe in such circumstances, even if I lived nest door. Yet some people are free to make other choices within guideance and the real problem is illegal mixing indoors and failure in hands face space indoors in public, work and transport.
Everything has an impact, which is the whole point.
> The situation is incredibly serious but there is no need to throw all proportionality out of the window.
⬆️ This
I can stomach limitations of my personal liberty when it is justified on practical grounds. What many posters here are seeking to impose on their fellow climbers is unjustified. If those restrictions are in fact the law or even the spirit of the law then the law is an ass.
Thanks... just said by someone at the time. It was a really shit but very busy day.
> Thanks... just said by someone at the time. It was a really shit but very busy day.
It really was quite a day
> ⬆️ This
> I can stomach limitations of my personal liberty when it is justified on practical grounds. What many posters here are seeking to impose on their fellow climbers is unjustified. If those restrictions are in fact the law or even the spirit of the law then the law is an ass.
The problem I suspect in your circumstances is that the law/guidance isn't limiting your freedom or need to exercise (note, I didn't say climb). It's saying if you have to travel to exercise it needs to have a reasonable and necessary aspect to it. You might need to travel to climb, but is climbing necessary? Are there no reasonable other quiet green spaces for you to exercise in your local area?
I also drive past Sainsbury’s to shop at Aldi. Shoot me
Fortunately the most noisily strict posters are just worried people venting. The real damage is being done in the opposite direction, major non compliance with legally supported rules.
We've always driven past our Aldi since March as social distancing there was a joke then and doesn't seem to have improved much.
> I also drive past Sainsbury’s to shop at Aldi. Shoot me
I'm not after shooting you Shark. One trip to get all your shopping might be reasonably necessary if the alternative is to go to Aldi and other shops to fill up with what Aldi don't stock.
You want to go climbing, I get it. But you're seriously not starved of options to stay climbing fit at home are you, that's no secret.
Exercise is important for retaining our physical fitness and mental health and what's best may differ from person to person. I've had to help deal with some nasty mental health issues in students and staff in my career because people played unnecessary 'hair shirt' games with unforseen consequences.
> Fortunately the most noisily strict posters are just worried people venting. The real damage is being done in the opposite direction, major non compliance with legally supported rules.
I wouldn't disagree with you about the major driver. To keep pushing the shopping analogy further though, it wouldn't be a bad thing if we did every little thing to help.
Worried people venting is me, because my wife works NHS clinical. Climbers are not uncommon on her ward and in need of her specialism.
Maybe I am looking at it through that lens. Maybe it's an exaggeration. An alternative might be that people are too insulated from a certain reality or lived experience of others and not seeing a wider picture.
> We've always driven past our Aldi since March as social distancing there was a joke then and doesn't seem to have improved much.
> Exercise is important for retaining our physical fitness and mental health and what's best may differ from person to person. I've had to help deal with some nasty mental health issues in students and staff in my career because people played unnecessary 'hair shirt' games with unforseen consequences.
You'll get no argument from me. But you've got to admit that's a world away from what some people are trying to claim.
If people are getting upset because they can't get out in perfect connies during a pandemic with the stress on the NHS such as it is, then maybe their obsession is the problem!
I'm mindful right now that transmission of the virus is secondary to no one needing any type of hospitalisation and attendance of outside assistance.
> I also drive past Sainsbury’s to shop at Aldi. Shoot me
I don't think that's particularly an issue; it's probably necessary because you can't afford Sainsbury's prices, say. However, I might want to shop at Booths and live down South (the furthest south you get them is the North West) - that would be out of order.
Use some sense.
Unhealthy obsessions a problem for climbers? No never, couldn't happen
In 2018, Mike 'Twid' Turner, Steve Long, Angus Kille and James Taylor travelled to Brazil to attempt a remote big wall. Their objective was to free climb a new route on the south face of Pedra Baiana - a huge granite wall in the centre of...
