UKC

Climbing with people not from your household

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Davidlees215 09 Jun 2020

What are people's opinions on climbing trad routes with people not from your household? 

My opinion had been that it was a complete impossibility to do safely, but maybe I'm being over cautious. 

I was speaking to 2 lads climbing a route at caley a few days ago whilst I was bouldering alone. I asked them how they were getting on as I'd done the route before and they were talking about keeping 2 metre distance whilst belaying as they're not from the same house. I've seen a few people on Facebook asking for climbing partners as well so I'm guessing a few people are doing it.

Is this possible? I suppose if you find a route with an easy start/ finish it might make it easier as they're the points you'd be close.to each other. Obviously there's touching the same equipment as well but I suppose a bit of sanitiser should limit that risk.

Maybe I'm just being over cautious as every time I go outside either to work, for exercise or to the shops someone comes within 2 metres of me for a few seconds and I've never begun to panic that I was about to catch covid. But then again is it an unnecessary risk?

3
 pec 09 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

The general scientific advice is that you need to be within 2m of someone for 15 mins to catch the virus unless they are actually coughing or sneezing at you and that's indoors. But there's nothing magic about 2m, it's just an arbitrary number which makes for a reasonable degree of safety without making life impossible, other countries are using 1.5m and outside the risk is even lower because moving air makes it harder to build up the concentration of virus in the air needed to reach an infective dose.

The most recent estimates are that only 1 in 1000 people are now infected anyway. Unless you or your climbing partner have reason to think you've been placed at higher risk, e.g. by using crowded public transport, then the chance of transmitting the virus between you are tiny especially since its highly unlikely either of you has it anyway.

If you travel separately and sanitise your hands between routes the risk, if not zero, is still tiny and much smaller than the normal risks involved with climbing.

4
 mark s 09 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

Theres more risk from a climbing accident. Ive done it and not died from covid yet  

27
 Jenny C 09 Jun 2020
In reply to mark s:

Presumably you haven't died from a climbing accident either. 

Post edited at 23:52
1
 Misha 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

Being close to someone for a few seconds is hardly going to be an issue, as you say it happens all the time in a supermarket or on a narrow pavement. As you say, avoiding routes with hard starts is another option. On single pitch crags with accessible top outs, the leader can abseil down to retrieve gear, then nip round to dismantle the abseil. Belaying in guide mode can also help as the leader can get out of the way as the second tops out.

 kevin stephens 10 Jun 2020
In reply to mark s:

> Theres more risk from a climbing accident. Ive done it and not died from covid yet  

But how sure can you be of not asymptotically passing it from your asymptomatic climbing partner to someone vulnerable?

I can’t be. And this is the reason I can’t visit my clients’ sites and like millions of others am on furlough with the country's economy and any semblance of normal life on hold until the virus is defeated 

Post edited at 06:24
3
 purkle 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

I haven't climbed any trad yet, I've been bouldering & trying to regain some confidence in rock. But surely the easiest way to maintain distance would be to each lead your own routes, with your own gear, and ab & strip yourself rather than seconding.

 Hannah V 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

Probably not the same as climbing, but in Norway we've been regularly meeting up with friends for ski tours for the last 3 months (sharing lifts too) and no one I know has had the virus yet. 

7
In reply to Davidlees215:

I'm kind of with you Pec, when you say,

'If you travel separately and sanitise your hands between routes the risk, if not zero, is still tiny and much smaller than the normal risks involved with climbing.' 

Still though, I've not been out with members outside my household yet. My partner is very new to climbing (couple of years in the gym) and has limited real climbing experience. Luckily though, she's seconded me on a few routes and has been keen/kind enough to do so again. Though this limits the grades/area and keeps it to single pitch. Though I realise I'm in a better position than others and don't wish to sound ungrateful or selfish. 

Am very keen to get back out properly. I think that if both partners are honest about the amount of contact they've had with others that extends beyond 15 minutes, places traveled etc then a judgement can be made based on potential risk. Same as any other judgement call. 

My main concern, however is the optic. Ultimately, we're supposed to be staying 2m away from people from other households. The impression that two people turning up in different cars, climbing together might create in the eyes of non climbers (or even other climbers) us unlikely to be positive. Might even lump climbers into the same group that went to Lulworth Cove a few weeks back. 

​​

1
 Fatclimber 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

Having tried it, I think it is fair to say you cannot climb and maintain the Uk definition of social distancing 100%.  It may feasibly be possible, but certainly for me, you just get into old habits and drift closer to your partner (usually followed by realization and a step back, where possible).  I do think we probably managed to keep to the German Social distancing rules and we certainly did avoid all contact.

I am in no way advocating that others do this, but just reporting on our experience of attempting to climb whilst maintaining social distancing.

I did find that other teams at the crag all worked together to ensure each group maintained social distancing.

 ianstevens 10 Jun 2020
In reply to kevin stephens:

> But how sure can you be of not asymptotically passing it from your asymptomatic climbing partner to someone vulnerable?

Easy - WFH, and have no interactions with anyone vulnerable by not visiting those shielding. Those shielding should be doing exactly that so no chance of interacting with them in public. Harder if you live with someone in the vulnerable/shielding category. 

If you can't avoid interaction with someone vulnerable, then it's wise to not meet with other households, climbing or otherwise. If you can - climb away.

3
J1234 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

I think where people are going wrong is they are assessing it as risk to themselves as opposed to their family, friends and the wider community.
I have taken you approach, but am returning to climbing proper next week, because I know far too many people out climbing now, and any impact I make will be diminished and I miss climbing.

Edit; obviously climbers are awesome and special and make superb choices, but if lesser people such as golfers, skateboarders, BBQers etc etc etc, do this, we will have a second wave, thousands will die, and it will cost the country billions, but never forget, must think of ones self and ticking that route.

Post edited at 10:11
6
 elsewhere 10 Jun 2020
In reply to ianstevens:

> Easy - WFH, and have no interactions with anyone vulnerable by not visiting those shielding. Those shielding should be doing exactly that so no chance of interacting with them in public. Harder if you live with someone in the vulnerable/shielding category. 

If it were easy we wouldn't have 40,000 dead.

You're disregarding the fact that shielding of the vulnerable is imperfect* - somebody has to do their shopping, personal care, medical care or property maintenance and you might interact with those people in public.

I'm not saying you shouldn't climb as even "new normal" activities have Covid risks. I am saying you should not pretend that your interactions do not increase the risk of transmission to somebody you might never meet.  Climbers don't have special immune system that stops disease transmission.

*care homes & hospital acquired infections for example

In reply to kevin stephens:

> any semblance of normal life on hold until the virus is defeated 

The virus will never be "defeated", it's a fact of modern life now like smartphones and seasonal flu. Just cos Boris reckons he needs a war time analogy to bolster the plucky Brits into compliance doesn't make it so.

The point of the lockdown was to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed, that has happened.

If you're waiting for a time that there is no longer Covid-19 in the world before you get back to some semblance of normality then you're going to be sitting in your bunker a loooooooong time.

Go out, enjoy your life, don't cough in your nans face (but you knew that already).

2
 oldie 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Misha:

> Being close to someone for a few seconds is hardly going to be an issue, as you say it happens all the time in a supermarket or on a narrow pavement. As you say, avoiding routes with hard starts is another option. On single pitch crags with accessible top outs, the leader can abseil down to retrieve gear, then nip round to dismantle the abseil. Belaying in guide mode can also help as the leader can get out of the way as the second tops out. <

Another potential risk is the rope itself. Even if only climbing single pitch should each leader use a separate rope? In which case the belayer still has potential to contaminate the rope and their device as it passes through their hands and is breathed on ,and hence contaminates the runners, and also the gear retrieving abseiler (unless he trails his own uncontaminated rope). Obviously masks would help. One end of the rope would presumably be reserved for only one leader to tie on on each climb. Probably overkill (no pun intended).

The arguments in the thread about giving a bad impression to non-climbers and giving a poor example to other people (a bit like Cummings) do seem pertinent. Speaking as someone who has broken guidelines to some extent, as have the majority of people I know.

Post edited at 10:42
 Martin Bennett 10 Jun 2020
In reply to kevin stephens:

> But how sure can you be of not asymptotically passing it from your asymptomatic climbing partner to someone vulnerable?

> I can’t be. And this is the reason I can’t visit my clients’ sites and like millions of others am on furlough with the country's economy and any semblance of normal life on hold until the virus is defeated 

I'm with you Kev. At 74 and having been bronchitic all my life and now with asthma I'm sure I'd have a very bad time (at best!) if I contracted this virus so whilst not exactly shielding we're not going out much beyond dog walking and local off road bike trails. Even then we're uneasy passing people who seem not to know what 2m is.  That's from my own point of view but on a wider front I think we've had enough of this thing now so want to do what's needed to avoid prolonging it/bringing about a 2nd wave.

 FactorXXX 10 Jun 2020
In reply to pec:

> The general scientific advice is that you need to be within 2m of someone for 15 mins to catch the virus unless they are actually coughing or sneezing at you and that's indoors.

Has any consideration been taken into account that the lead climber is directly above the belayer for perhaps the whole duration of the climb?
 

1
 Dave Garnett 10 Jun 2020
In reply to FactorXXX:

> Has any consideration been taken into account that the lead climber is directly above the belayer for perhaps the whole duration of the climb?

I think the risk from that must be incredibly small, even in completely still air.  With the breeze blowing pretty much constantly at most crags it must be as near zero as makes no difference.  You are much more likely to pick it up through swapping gear or reading your mate's guidebook. 

If you make a sensible choice of partner, and at least try to avoid close contact as much as possible, then, for me at least, that's an acceptable level of risk when I compare it to going shopping (which is pretty much the only other contact I have outside the family).  Using public transport must be another level of risk (and I would actively avoid contact with anyone was doing that regularly). 

 elsewhere 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Boris\'s Johnson:

> The virus will never be "defeated",

For practical purposes Austria & Australia (I looked at "A", not whole A-Z of countries) have the disease eliminated (defeated?) at handful of new cases per day. They should be able to maintain that indefinitely with their tried and tested policies to reduce transmission and clamp down on outbreaks.

> The point of the lockdown was to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed, that has happened.

And the point of continued pressure is to reduce transmission is to get the "new normal" as close to the old normal as possible and as quickly as possible. 

When the disease is reduced to a sufficiently low level it, the vulnerable feel safe enough to leave isolation as they're unlikely to encounter an infected person. Presumably that applies in NZ (zero new cases) and perhaps many countries with few new cases.

It can be done. It has been done.

In reply to elsewhere:

Fair point. 

I do think we risk being over cautious in how long we extend the measures for, first we were waiting for the NHS to be able to cope, then we were told track and trace would lead to an easing of lockdown and also the production of a workable vaccine. These second two keep getting pushed further and further back.

I agree the vulnerable should be protected however, and I don't want to sound callous here, how many of the vulnerable need to "feel" safe before that criteria is met? 

In regards to Aus and NZ having eliminated the virus unless they plan on shutting their countries to outside visitors or stop allowing residents to leave there will always be a risk of the virus returning. Vaccines similar to those as for diseases such as polio that lead to total eradication will be a few years off, if they ever come, due to the variable nature of the virus. We have had the common flu for a while now and there seems to be no vaccine. Covid is part of that same family so it makes sense to me that a vaccine for Covid will be as difficult to find as a vaccine for the flu.

 pog100 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Boris\'s Johnson:

I basically agree with your arguments but just as points, flu and Covid, apart from both being RNA viruses are not very related at all and we do have vaccines against flu, just not ones that can eliminate it because of the ease with which it changes.

In reply to pog100:

I appreciate the points about the flu vaccine, I was under the impression that covid and the flu were more closely linked in their makeup. 

Edit: To clarify, when I was talking about the flu vaccine I meant in terms of eradication of the virus, not slowing or preventing transmission.

Post edited at 13:19
 elsewhere 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Boris\'s Johnson:

> Fair point. 

> I do think we risk being over cautious in how long we extend the measures for, first we were waiting for the NHS to be able to cope, then we were told track and trace would lead to an easing of lockdown and also the production of a workable vaccine. These second two keep getting pushed further and further back.

Yes, here everything gets delivered late.

> I agree the vulnerable should be protected however, and I don't want to sound callous here, how many of the vulnerable need to "feel" safe before that criteria is met? 

An individual decides their own approach to risk but the better we all do the more of them will be subjectively and objectively safe.

> In regards to Aus and NZ having eliminated the virus unless they plan on shutting their countries to outside visitors or stop allowing residents to leave there will always be a risk of the virus returning.

I assume they plan for an almost certain return of the virus but aim be ready to respond with contact tracing and whatever they do now to keep outbreaks infrequent*,  small & brief to save lives and reduce economic/social disruption.

*quarantine but maybe less stringent restrictions for direct travel between countries with little Covid.

In reply to elsewhere:

Appreciate the well thought out response, always interesting to hear another point of view and attempt to broaden my understanding of the situation.

Cheers.

 SDM 10 Jun 2020

In reply to SteveX and Fatclimber:

> Having tried it, I think it is fair to say you cannot climb and maintain the Uk definition of social distancing 100%.

Agreed. If you are sport climbing or trad climbing, it is impossible to guarantee that you will remain more than 2m away from your partner at all times.

If you/they fall at the start/before the first protection/when pulling up slack to clip, there will always be a non-zero risk of you ending up less than 2m apart if they fall at the wrong point.

So whether it is appropriate for you to climb with someone from outside your house comes down to how much risk you consider to be acceptable and the risk to yourself and the people you come in to contact with. The risk from climbing with one other person should be very low and far lower than for example going in to a shop or an office.

Due to vulnerable family members, my acceptance of risk is much lower than other people's. I almost exclusively boulder where guaranteed distancing is easy to maintain if you are sensible. Yet there are still a lot of people who I wouldn't agree to meet with for a boulder (I am also not going inside any shops etc).

> I think where people are going wrong is they are assessing it as risk to themselves as opposed to their family, friends and the wider community.

Exactly. The risk of covid-19 to myself should be very low. But the risk to my family is far higher.

My risk assessment on what is acceptable is based on the most vulnerable person who I come in to contact with. Anything else would be selfish.

J1234 10 Jun 2020
In reply to SDM:

> In reply to SteveX 

> My risk assessment on what is acceptable is based on the most vulnerable person who I come in to contact with. Anything else would be selfish.

I would agree with this. I come into contact with my 84 year old dad, but he has now decided that he is going delivering Pizzas, no you did not imagine that. So that ship has sailed.

 Misha 10 Jun 2020
In reply to kevin stephens:

If you know that your partner is WFH or furloughed and doesn’t live with someone vulnerable and doesn’t have kids at school, the risk of them passing it on to someone vulnerable is pretty low.

As I’ve said to others, I admire your self restraint. Thing is, this will probably go on till late next year, assuming an effective vaccine is found by then. I’m happy to WFH until then if need be. That cuts out the main transmission vector for me. I’m happy not to go to non-food shops or cultural events, though I rarely do that anyway. But I can’t put climbing totally on hold until then. My life would be reduced to work and drinking beer!

 Misha 10 Jun 2020
In reply to J1234:

Or you could say that climbing or doing any other outdoor activities with one or two others where everyone is at relatively low risk of having or spreading it is pretty low risk compared to the idiots crowding the beaches and meeting in groups. Nothing is zero risk unless you sit at home 24/7 (I did yesterday, do I get a gold star?). 

 Misha 10 Jun 2020
In reply to oldie:

Just use a separate rope end for each person. You can also coil it in gloves. Of course you can’t eliminate risk of transmission completely but it’s a matter of probability. Probability your or your partner has it x probability of transmitting it, say because you touched a quickdraw and then the rope ran through it and then you touched the rope. Low x low = very low. Then if the probability of you or your partner passing it on to someone is also low, that’s low x low x low = extremely low. I’m oversimplifying but this is what it comes down to.

Keep each aspect low risk. So I certainly wouldn’t climb with a doctor who looks after Covid patients and probably not with anyone who is working with other people in an indoor environment. I wouldn’t car share either. 

1
 Misha 10 Jun 2020
In reply to Boris\'s Johnson:

You’re on the right lines. Covid is most similar to a couple of the common cold viruses. Which is bad news really. 

J1234 11 Jun 2020
In reply to Misha:

I hope you are well, strange times.
I do not think it helpful to speak of people on beaches, or to call them idiots, as it distracts from the issue of our, or our communities actions. I know climbers, and I know they want to climb and I think that an awful lot of climbers will seek to justify why they can climb. I am under the impression that meeting up with one other person, not from your household and keeping distance and La La La, is OK, but straight away you are stretching his to "one or two others", now I am not good at maths, but that would seem to increase potential infection by 50%, and that sounds bad to me.
Also after lockdown a club I am in has a facebook group, not that I would ever use it, and pretty much the day after lockdown eased, about 14 members, if not all members, 14 people loosely connected, all went to the same quarry. Now I know many of these people and they are all intelligent, socially aware, really nice people, but WTF, they went and had a meet, in all but name. But the fact is they wanted to climb, and each and everyone of the justified it one way or another.
Also if you look at log books, and maybe its the small sample I have seen but people are going out in threes and climbing with multiple different people over different days.

Now I could be over cautious and I will be joining in from next week, but the potential down side to all this is very large.

1
 springfall2008 11 Jun 2020
In reply to Davidlees215:

My personal opinion would be to try to stick to one climbing partner outside your household and ensure neither of you comes into contact with vulnerable people (those with high risk of getting seriously ill from Covid) or themselves is likely to be infected (e.g. takes the tube to work or is an NHS worker).

It seems footballers are starting to play the sport again, there's nothing special about them vs anyone else undertaking a sport.

Post edited at 15:55
 Misha 11 Jun 2020
In reply to J1234:

I don't disagree. As I say, it's a case of keeping the number of your climbing partners low and sticking with people who are at low risk of having it or passing it on.

1
 Misha 12 Jun 2020
In reply to springfall2008:

To be fair, I think footballers have special procedures including regular testing.


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...