UKC

Dear All,

I hope you are keeping safe and well.
My neighbour tells me the government says we should be out exercising for only one hour; is that correct?

With thanks

Nope.

Nonsense.

https://www.runnersworld.com/uk/news/a31973975/coronavirus-uk-exercise-rule...

Unless there has been an update that I missed!

I didn't do any yesterday, so that balances it out, no?

I walked my dog today for a distance that I could run in an hour! That's how it works, right?!

A better summary of our rights.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/what-are-your-rights-in-lockd...

Obviously, our duty to ourselves and each other requires us all to take these regulations seriously and to do as much as we can to stop the spread of the virus. 

This thread is closing on 200 posts:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/hill_talk/how_long_is_a_walk__cycle__run-...

We don't need another thread discussing this.

Yes, I'd like to see the mods starting to delete duplicate threads.

You have two main ways to get an answer to this.

1. Ask on a website such as this, and receive lots of answers from people who may or may not have a clue as to what the true picture is. Some will tell you the rules are far too strict verging on fascist/communist (delete as applicable) and you can do what you want. Others will tell you that simply opening your front door makes you a mass-murderer.

2. Check the official Government and NHS websites for the current advice, supplemented if you want me checking the relevant emergency legislation.

Hope this helps

These threads on the running pages on Facebook are also becoming very tiresome. Bragging, extremely critical posts and unscientific comments predominate. Interestingly people doing high mileage are making their Strava accounts private despite discussing on facebook - is this secret guilt, or are Derbyshire Police going through the challenge lists as we speak. The problem is that the correct answer for an individual is variable.

Reading the legislation there is no time limit, but long runs in a city must be considered unwise and unhelpful, whereas a road/track run in the countryside will likely have few implications for population health. Choosing to run really early or later in the day is likely to be helpful whilst making sure you have support from home if there was a problem (if you can) is a good idea. The risk is that if people take the michael we will end up running up and down the garden!

Unfortunately, FB, UKC and other online forums are a form of release and may contrary to the predominant belief help as well as hurt peoples mental health. Also. too heavy handed moderation would likely spawn a whole new set of tiresome messages.

I don't see how the kind of toxic threads I've seen on this stuff help anyone (not so much UKC but other platforms). Unless being part of an angry mob gives you a feeling of belonging.

I agree, it does little for me - but people are worried about a lot of things and venting their spleen on line might help them from being difficult at home through the frustration of it all.  It doesn't make it nice, or proper. Overall what the world needs now is common sense and kindness (in its broadest - not soppy sense). 

The thing with kindness is that for it to work your kindness needs to include those you dislike or disagree with. I'm working on that but it ain't easy.

As with all of these things it's best to go to the source for the information. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-y... (see under Item 1).

At the moment the Government aren't giving any rules on the length of time.

I can't believe the amount of nonsense being spouted elsewhere about exercise. I've left all the fell running groups on facebook that I was part of because the sheer quantity of hideous rubbish on there made me never want to race again.

I'm largely avoiding the Singletrack forums for the same reason. Some astonishing vitriol around this.

Thank god, I thought it was just me. When did climbing (fell running/mountain biking) lose its rebel spirit?... Where have all the hippies, punks and misfits gone?... Has our sport been overrun by a bunch of neo-fascist, Daily Mail reading boot boys?... Or is being part of an angry mob the latest Instagram trend?

I'm not advocating spreading the virus and am currently climbing at home with a little bit of biking and walking on the side (I'm lucky I can get out to some decent places from my doorstep) but the hysterical shouting down of other peoples choices has definitely left a bad taste. I genuinely think that the amount of vitriol coming out from forums is depressing and can't understand when we, as climbers, became qualified to make public health decisions on what's acceptable behaviour or not on behalf of other folk.  

Perhaps some people feel strongly as they have a vested interest in controlling the spread of CV19. Perhaps they're elderly. Perhaps they or their loved-ones are in an 'at risk' group for health reasons, and catching the virus carries a high chance of an early death (I know several in this group. They have young children and are genuinely and justifiably terrified). Perhaps they or their partners work in the NHS and are cognisant of both the risk they're under from exposure to CV19, and also have a better insight into the effects on 'the system' of it currently and in the coming weeks.

Or you know, perhaps they're just bad people whose natural authoritarian tendencies are bubbling to the surface. If it wasn't this pandemic they would have found some other excuse to try to control other people's behaviour.

The real "art" here is of course making sure nobody else knows you've done any of the above activities, except members of your household. If you've a) met the legislation and b) not seen anyone you've upheld both the letter and spirit of the law as far as I can tell...

I'm sure people are still going out and doing these things, just nobody knows they are because they're selecting activities which allow them to socially isolate and ergo not be seen doing them. Then it's pretty easy to not put them on social media, and it appears as if nobody is, for example, doing any climbing at all.

True, I can understand that people are scared, and some might have more of an insight. But I doubt any are qualified to make those decisions (online forums are generally not where experts at the cutting edge release information), and none of it excuses the online hatred being shown to people who are often making sensible decisions.

The guidelines are deliberately vague I think. They allow a bit of wriggle room which is going to be absolutely essential if this is to continue for several months without people going all Jack Torrance. The issue I'm seeing on these threads is that people interpret the guidelines differently but are immediately fully invested in their interpretation and convinced that it's the right / only one, perhaps because getting this right is a high stakes thing and requires a concerted community response. There are also big differences in what you can safely do depending on where you live and one size fits all rules aren't really helpful in managing that. That creates an element of jealousy, if you live in a big city and your only option is a jog round a busy park hearing about others going for nice runs on quiet trails isn't what you want at this point regardless of how safe it is for them to do that. Throw in all the other stresses around this and it's a pretty volatile mix.

Anyway, here's a picture of a happy little cat with a bottle of beer to take everyone's mind off it.  https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/images1/1/0412/06/asahi-super-lucky-cat-...

I've not posted much about this, but I've observed the following repeated interaction on multiple threads:

A. This is a bit daft, I know I can get out at no harm to myself or anyone else.

B. Sure, but we're being asked not to, for the greater good.

A. Can't we just use some common sense? I know I can get out and cause no harm.

B. You're not special, please just follow the advice and isolate, leaving your house as little as possible.

A. Yes, but bouldering, fly fishing and coasteering haven't been specifically banned, and anyway it's just 'advice' not law. I can make my own judgements.

B. FFS you tw*t, please just interpret the spirit of the advice, ponder what it's actually trying to achieve and act accordingly! Stay at home, exercise once a day from the door and avoid people, don't do anything that puts you or others at risk. Note that the BMC, UKC, Mountain Rescue have all asked you to stop climbing and hillwalking.

A. Alright fascist, where have all the rebels gone.... etc.

AND REPEAT.

You can break that chain Chris.

Pretty accurate, aside from the exercise from the door bit. Many people are saying it, but it's not actually true. Driving locally to exercise has not been "banned". There's no time restriction on exercise. There's not even an official limit to the number of times you can go out and exercise per day. Advice to police forces has recently been clarified as such after all the misinterpretation.

This is all that exists in law: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/regulation/6/made

Of course. Social pressure and ideas of responsibility from various people with varying levels of sense and evidence say rather different things about this entire problem. Wrongly or rightly. I think everyone would rather have it in law than the forum equivalent of forwarding emotional facebook misinformation infograms

Of course they are. I know people who are hillwalking from their house or after a short drive, going for a run after a short drive and training on abandoned railway bridges. They are aware of the government guidelines and are acting sensibly within them with proper social distancing. Because they don't frequent forums like this and encounter the extremist opinions of some people, they are blissfully unaware that what they are doing might be in any way controversial.

I am following all of those guidelines that you mentioned and as I already stated I am climbing at home on a home board. My point being that we shouldn't just criticise people for making choices which we may not. After all most of the information is guidance not law and nowhere is there any evidence that, say, driving to exercise locally is spreading C-19 at a faster rate. So to call someone a c#@t because they are not falling in line with what you or facebook deem acceptable does seem, at the very least, populist.

That’s the legislation. The detail of the restrictions are not specified in the law, the law just allows the government to apply restrictions. 
 

It’s like a law that allows the government to penalise you for speeding. And then the actual speeding restrictions are specified elsewhere, places, speeds etc. 
 

Gove doesn’t help. Michael Gove said on Tuesday that "people can go for the standard length of run or walk that they ordinarily would have done. But… the important thing is, once a day".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51176409

I agree in that calling someone a C**T is both poor form and counter productive. Generally I think people can be reasoned with/convinced of a different position (talking as a general principal here), and will never be insulted or harangued into one.

On the other hand, as a general principal I think we should be free to criticise people for making choices we may not. This applies in any and all areas of life really. It's how progress can be made. Just do it cordially and with a goal of convincing not condemning. I think that's both a tactic and an ethic. 

I find the simplest thing, as you say, is to not be active on social media, this forum is my only active one, apart from a WhatsApp group for our small street (and mostly ignoring that which seems to be about growing veg and swapping recipes). So apart from some of the OTT posts on this site I have not seen any of the cr*p circulating on FB or Twitter etc. Ignorance can indeed be bliss!

I agree that there is no reason why a civil discussion shouldn't take place. However, there has been a kneejerk, over the top and often unpleasant response regarding peoples exercise allowance from what may well be a minority, but a very vocal and, either, overly hysterical or overly puritanical section on this forum (and from what I gather on fell running and MBR forums). I just kind of thought that it was disappointing to see this behavior coming from the climbing world, after all are we not traditionally counter culture, I thought that the whole point was that we didn't like being told what to do so why should we become such puritanical enforcers of rule over sense.

Can I ask the relevance of your traditional counter-culture to a viral pandemic? It's one thing to 'stick it to the man', but I don't really understand what that has to do with taking actions to reduce the spread of a virus, which has no regard for attitudes. 

On this thread you've referred to people as "neo-fascist, Daily Mail reading boot boys", an "angry mob", "overly hysterical" (as opposed to the correct level of hysterical presumably) and "overly puritanical". 

But it's everyone else you want to be civil?

As I said I am following guidelines I just don't see why we have to be nasty to people who are bending the rules but in a sensible way. It is obviously a serious problem but pollution has been shown to contribute to up to 40,000 premature deaths in the UK per year and forgive me if I missed it but I can't remember any forum threads shouting at people to stop driving to their local crag. Or police releasing pictures to shame drinkers leaving their local pub as alcohol also contributes to a great number of deaths, so in this respect I do find it a hysterical reaction. 

There definitely seems to be an element of mob rule going on with members of the public deciding what's allowed and what's not and those that shout the loudest are the ones being followed. I for one will continue to follow guidelines but I certainly won't be shaming anyone who has dared to cycle for 1hr and 15 mins, or has ventured on to their local fells, or driven 10 mins to avoid the hordes in town. F**k the shamers.

I agree with all of this entirely. 

Because they don't frequent forums like this and encounter the extremist opinions of some people, they are blissfully unaware that what they are doing might be in any way controversial.

I'm afraid I can't agree with his however. Couldn't say why of course  

On this thread you've referred to people as "neo-fascist, Daily Mail reading boot boys", an "angry mob", "overly hysterical" (as opposed to the correct level of hysterical presumably) and "overly puritanical" and said "f*ck the shamers". 

But it's everyone else you want to be civil?

Well over twenty years ago, I reckon. It's certainly never been particularly rebellious during my 25 years or so climbing. I'm surprised so many people appear not to have noticed.

Sorry,

I say chaps would you mind piping down a bit. Me and some of the other fellows are getting a wee bit peeved at being portrayed as mass murderers.

Is that better?

It might show you understand what constitutes the "civil discussion" you claim to desire, otherwise you appear to merely be whining "you're all being mean to me", like a little girl.

In what sense don't you agree with it?

Read between the lines!

I think I know what you are referring to, but I don't see the relevance.

I never said that anyone was being 'mean' to me. In fact as I'm not on facebook and rarely comment on this forum no-one has been 'mean' to me. However, as I originally noted many people were receiving an unusual amount of abuse for behaving well within both the law and common sense. That has wound me up and if you want to stick up for the online bullies, then by all means, do take offence because I meant everything that I said about them.

That's fine, you claimed you wanted a civil discussion but you don't. But perhaps if you post some examples of this terrible abuse you've come across you might make a better point.

I'm shocked conversations like this are still going on. Penny still not dropped in the UK.

Here in many parts of France this week the number of people requiring ICU beds has exceeded the number of beds available. People are being moved around the country on special TGVs to areas where beds are available.

I'm glad I'm not going to be that mountain biker who needs a bunch of people and resources to fix my broken collar bone or worse.

E

Actually I'm not sure that I ever claimed that I wanted a civil discussion, and I'm not quite sure what you want to civilly discuss as you've not made any points other than, that I'm being uncivil, which I wholly accept.

We are not ruled by government dictat. The Act clearly states what the legal restrictions are, anything else is just advisory.

(lol, a downmark for democracy and the rule of law)

Fair enough, you only said you didn't see why a civil discussion couldn't take place (while demonstrating why). 

Any examples of this terrible abuse yet?

Actually I think the overwhelming majority have got that message. MTB sites have been displaying a banner for at least a week that says 'No Car, No Gnarr, Not Far.' I think we have somewhat looser restrictions than in France particularly around exercise but I don't see why that should necessarily lead to any worse outcome here with regards to transmission or burden on health care.  I can however see it leading to significantly better outcomes with regard to maintaining general physical and mental health in this period.

Not quite. Schedule 21 goes on to detail that the government will announce the actual details of the restrictions on their website and in the London Gazette.

So they have the legal power to make you stay at home except for certain exemptions. Those exemptions are not detailed there. They are detailed in government announcements. And yesterday people have been fined and imprisoned for not obeying them this past weekend. 

And being more sustainable in the longer term. There are reports already of issues with the strict lockdown in Italy after only about three weeks and there are certainly already signs of problems here. If, as seems likely, this lasts months rather than weeks there will be serious difficulties.

I think anyone who has been watching these forums will know that abuse has taken place (on both sides of the argument I might add) and it seems very Trumpian to deny it and claim conspiracy. As for the post about civil discussion, I can't see anything offensive about it, I thought that there was an unpleasant response and I found it disappointing. I'm quite happy to get offensive if you'd like but that certainly wasn't.

We will probably get to a tighter lockdown in the next couple of weeks if the current lockdown doesn’t prove to be working. 
 

We have built two massive field hospitals in London and the Midlands so people will be or maybe even already are being transported to them. 

It’s very childish. 

Future events might prove me wrong but at this stage I think this is one thing UK gov has got right or at least struck an acceptable and more sustainable balance on. 

I'm denying nothing, it's very Trumplike of you to lie. All I'm asking for are some examples where people have been horribly abused for exercising unreasonably.

And I didn't claim your post about civil discussion was offensive, why make things up? I was pointing out that in this thread you have been uncivil, whilst at the same time saying you didn't see why civil discussion couldn't take place. You call people neo-Fascist, daily mail reading and hysterical and then get butt-hurt on behalf of other people.

Just stop it. It's not nice. 

It's not big or clever either, but it passes the time.

I've already admitted to being uncivil and made no apology for it, plus you accepted that standpoint at the time. I wasn't upset on behalf of other people but disappointed to find out that factions of the climbing community held such populist views, and in some cases encouraged the public shaming of people.

As it happens you still haven't issued any sort of point of view so if we're going to be arguing over semantics then f@#k it I'm out.

I was waiting to offer a point of view on your examples, but all you've offered is a nebulous "ooh, aren't people rotten".