walkhighlands

This forum is for general discussion about walking and scrambling... If writing a report or sharing your experiences from a route, please use the other boards.

Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Gareth Harper » Sat Jan 09, 2021 7:37 pm

No mention of travel for outdoor leisure at all.

Probably because very few people are travelling for outdoor leisure.
The 5 mile from your house makes no sense,

The risk of catching Covid19 is extremely low outside compared to indoors.
the police who are super spreaders.

Can you back that up?
I guess it's a learning curve for them like the rest of us.

Difficult times for all. We just need to all do our bit, stay calm, and hopefully soon the current restrictions and the roll out of the vaccine will hopefully ease the current crises.
Gareth Harper
 
Posts: 449
Munros:204   Corbetts:82
Fionas:26   Donalds:50
Sub 2000:6   
Joined: Aug 25, 2013
Location: Ayrshire

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Tringa » Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:00 pm

al78 wrote:
Tringa wrote:Agree. As the Government have failed again to make this mandatory and simple I think the police should have had a word with the two ladies about exercise in future.

The sections in this - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-lockdown-stay-at-home#exercising - on exercise and travel use "should" rather than "must".

I think it would have been far better, given all of England is effectively in the same tier, to say something on the lines of " .. you must not travel more than 5 miles to take exercise". The 5 miles could be defined as either in a straight line or by road.

It would then put the onus on each person make sure their travel was in line with the law.

Dave


That probably would be easier for individuals to obey, but it would disadvantage people who live in dense urban areas more than five miles from countryside/open space. I'm lucky that I can cycle into countryside within a few minutes, others are not so fortunate, and those who do live in or very near city centres may be living in poorer/deprived areas who would mentally most benefit from getting out of the city and getting some quality exercise.

The rules as they stand seem somewhat inconsistent in some situations regarding genuine risk. I am allowed to cycle from my front door to the South Downs and back, yet I'm not allowed to drive to the South Downs and go on a short walk. Is the latter really more COVID risky than the former? I probably could cycle 10 miles to Warninglid and do one of my favourite 5 mile circular walks, but can't drive there and do the same walk. That is the problem with blanket rules, they can't cover every theoretically possible scenario and be logically consistent with them all.


I agree blanket policies can have disadvantages but at least they are clear. However even in urban areas it is possible to exercise easily from home.
I live in one of the most densely populated local authorities in the UK and I don't find it difficult to take walks. Admittedly, they are not walks I would choose to do. I'd much rather be in Torridon or around Gairloch, but I have to accept things are not normal, or the way I would like them, just now; and probably won't be anytime soon.

Dave
User avatar
Tringa
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Sep 2, 2008
Location: London

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Marty_JG » Sat Jan 09, 2021 9:51 pm

Giant Stoneater wrote:did the police try to reason, maybe they were pushed to the limit of their powers and left with no option


They called a Starbucks coffee "a picnic".

That is not a force to make assumptions of reasonableness about. And beyond that, why are they trying to "reason" with people acting safely and lawfully.
User avatar
Marty_JG
Backpacker
 
Posts: 1223
Munros:10   Corbetts:2
Fionas:2   
Sub 2000:3   
Islands:3
Joined: Sep 12, 2016
Location: Glasgow

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Spade » Sat Jan 09, 2021 9:55 pm

Marty_JG wrote:
al78 wrote:Boris dithered about for two months allowing the virus to take hold, we are all paying the price for that now.


It's not been any better up here. Scotland let people fly off to Spain, let people legally head to Blackpool whist "advising" them morally not to.




Behaviours from blurry advice
Spade
 
Posts: 172
Munros:80   Corbetts:5
Joined: Sep 23, 2010
Location: Annecy

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Spade » Sat Jan 09, 2021 9:59 pm

Folk should not bend the rules or self interpret them , it would appear Northern Ireland are clamping down on unnecessary activity. From wee Nic's blurry rules , this is why folk are pushing the boundaries.
Spade
 
Posts: 172
Munros:80   Corbetts:5
Joined: Sep 23, 2010
Location: Annecy

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Marty_JG » Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:12 am

Spade wrote:From wee Nic's blurry rules.


You have been repeatedly informed, in detail, this is simply not true.

If you dislike the government that is entirely your right, but please do not spread misinformation on this forum about the rules not being clear. They are crystal clear and you have been repeatedly informed of them in crystal clear terms.
User avatar
Marty_JG
Backpacker
 
Posts: 1223
Munros:10   Corbetts:2
Fionas:2   
Sub 2000:3   
Islands:3
Joined: Sep 12, 2016
Location: Glasgow

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Spade » Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:36 am

Marty_JG wrote:
Spade wrote:From wee Nic's blurry rules.


You have been repeatedly informed, in detail, this is simply not true.

If you dislike the government that is entirely your right, but please do not spread misinformation on this forum about the rules not being clear. They are crystal clear and you have been repeatedly informed of them in crystal clear terms.



I am truly very sorry that you dislike my opinion or contribution to this thread.
Spade
 
Posts: 172
Munros:80   Corbetts:5
Joined: Sep 23, 2010
Location: Annecy

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby al78 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:55 am

Spade wrote:
Marty_JG wrote:
al78 wrote:Boris dithered about for two months allowing the virus to take hold, we are all paying the price for that now.


It's not been any better up here. Scotland let people fly off to Spain, let people legally head to Blackpool whist "advising" them morally not to.


Yet that is the route Sweden originally took, no official lockdown, but asking people to morally do the right thing. Problem is the UK population are collectively much closer to Americans in general attitude than mainland Europe and Scandinavia, hence we get the same result as Americans.
User avatar
al78
Walker
 
Posts: 1407
Munros:32   Corbetts:9
Donalds:1
Joined: Feb 1, 2018

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby al78 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:58 am

Spade wrote:
Marty_JG wrote:
Spade wrote:From wee Nic's blurry rules.


You have been repeatedly informed, in detail, this is simply not true.

If you dislike the government that is entirely your right, but please do not spread misinformation on this forum about the rules not being clear. They are crystal clear and you have been repeatedly informed of them in crystal clear terms.



I am truly very sorry that you dislike my opinion or contribution to this thread.


He called you out on posting an assertion that was wrong. Incorrect assertions often do provoke corrective responses on public forums.
User avatar
al78
Walker
 
Posts: 1407
Munros:32   Corbetts:9
Donalds:1
Joined: Feb 1, 2018

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Spade » Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:39 pm

I am truly very sorry that you dislike my opinion or contribution to this thread.[/quote]

He called you out on posting an assertion that was wrong. Incorrect assertions often do provoke corrective responses on public forums.[/quote]

I am sorry. I now know other opinions should not be mentioned.
Spade
 
Posts: 172
Munros:80   Corbetts:5
Joined: Sep 23, 2010
Location: Annecy

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby davekeiller » Sun Jan 10, 2021 1:01 pm

@Spade the law in Scotland is clear. You are allowed to travel up to 5 miles outside your local authority to reach the start point for outdoor exercise that starts and ends in the same place. You are permitted to participate in outdoor exercise alone or with any or all members of your household or support bubble, or alternatively you may meet with precisely one person from another household.
What is unclear or blurry about that?
davekeiller
 
Posts: 984
Munros:154   Corbetts:31
Fionas:4   Donalds:3
Sub 2000:11   Hewitts:19
Wainwrights:20   
Joined: Oct 25, 2013

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Marty_JG » Sun Jan 10, 2021 1:12 pm

Spade wrote:I am truly very sorry that you dislike my opinion or contribution to this thread.


Opinion is very welcome, dishonesty is unwelcome.

If you were to have the opinion we should have a stricter lockdown, fine. If you were to have the opinion we should have a laxer lockdown, fine. Those are opinions.

The law is crystal clear. It has been stated to you, in crystal clear terms, several times. You are still claiming is is "blurry" despite offering no evidence to anyone. This is not acceptable disinformation to release. We have people reading this forums for advice and to be told the law is "blurry" is both unhelpful and untrue.

I mean, okay: if you can explain to any of us what you find unclear or blurry about the law we will engage with you in good faith. Just what about the law don't you understand in crystal clear terms? Tell us!
User avatar
Marty_JG
Backpacker
 
Posts: 1223
Munros:10   Corbetts:2
Fionas:2   
Sub 2000:3   
Islands:3
Joined: Sep 12, 2016
Location: Glasgow

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Backpacker » Sun Jan 10, 2021 2:40 pm

Marty_JG wrote:
Spade wrote:I am truly very sorry that you dislike my opinion or contribution to this thread.


Opinion is very welcome, dishonesty is unwelcome.

If you were to have the opinion we should have a stricter lockdown, fine. If you were to have the opinion we should have a laxer lockdown, fine. Those are opinions.

The law is crystal clear. It has been stated to you, in crystal clear terms, several times. You are still claiming is is "blurry" despite offering no evidence to anyone. This is not acceptable disinformation to release. We have people reading this forums for advice and to be told the law is "blurry" is both unhelpful and untrue.

I mean, okay: if you can explain to any of us what you find unclear or blurry about the law we will engage with you in good faith. Just what about the law don't you understand in crystal clear terms? Tell us!


I think what he may be referring to is although we’re legally allowed to move around our LA area, we’re being asked not to by the police and politicians and to stay in our local area. I will admit the only part of this now I’m keeping an eye on is what I can and can’t do, I’ve hit a bit of COVID fatigue
User avatar
Backpacker
Munro compleatist
 
Posts: 1402
Munros:18   Corbetts:115
Fionas:38   Donalds:4
Sub 2000:57   Hewitts:2
Wainwrights:3   Islands:4
Joined: Jan 8, 2013

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby Marty_JG » Sun Jan 10, 2021 3:53 pm

Guidance on stay at home regulations that came into effect on 5 January 2021.

Stay at Home

To minimise the risk of spreading the virus, you must stay at home as much as possible. By law, in a level 4 area, you can only leave your home (or garden) for an essential purpose.

There is a list of examples of reasonable excuses below. Although you can leave home for these purposes, you should stay as close to home as possible. Shop on-line or use local shops and services wherever you can. Travel no further than you need to reach to a safe, non-crowded place to exercise in a socially distanced way. To minimise the risk of spread of coronavirus it is crucial that we all avoid unnecessary travel.

Examples of reasonable excuses to go out:

    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


The list is more comprehensive, I have picked the exercise one. Other reasons include essential shopping, banking, healthcare, charity help, care work, legal proceedings, animal welfare.

I honestly, honestly fail to see the blurryness. You're being told what you can lawfully do to leave the house (and the rules on exercise in particular, of interest to us here on this forum, are particularly well defined) and you are being asked to do it as little as possible.
User avatar
Marty_JG
Backpacker
 
Posts: 1223
Munros:10   Corbetts:2
Fionas:2   
Sub 2000:3   
Islands:3
Joined: Sep 12, 2016
Location: Glasgow

Re: Glencoe hillwalkers fined for travel violation.

Postby al78 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:22 pm

Marty_JG wrote:
Guidance on stay at home regulations that came into effect on 5 January 2021.

Stay at Home

To minimise the risk of spreading the virus, you must stay at home as much as possible. By law, in a level 4 area, you can only leave your home (or garden) for an essential purpose.

There is a list of examples of reasonable excuses below. Although you can leave home for these purposes, you should stay as close to home as possible. Shop on-line or use local shops and services wherever you can. Travel no further than you need to reach to a safe, non-crowded place to exercise in a socially distanced way. To minimise the risk of spread of coronavirus it is crucial that we all avoid unnecessary travel.

Examples of reasonable excuses to go out:

    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


The list is more comprehensive, I have picked the exercise one. Other reasons include essential shopping, banking, healthcare, charity help, care work, legal proceedings, animal welfare.

I honestly, honestly fail to see the blurryness. You're being told what you can lawfully do to leave the house (and the rules on exercise in particular, of interest to us here on this forum, are particularly well defined) and you are being asked to do it as little as possible.


There is a bit of blurriness in that to abide by the exercise rules, some personal judgement has to be made. If I want to go on a bike ride for exercise, I am allowed to do that, but I have to avoid all unnecessary travel and stay as close to home as possible. The only way I can logically obey that rule is to buy an exercise bike, but I don't think the spirit of the rules demand I do that. Therefore I am allowed to go on a bike ride, but I have to judge myself how far and for how long I should be riding. The rule is blurry because it would be impossible to theoretically write a computer program that obeys it i.e. you can't put down strict unambiguous logical instructions that a machine could follow.

As my job involves sitting in front of a computer all day and I am feeling out of condition, I intend to go out regularly on a nice rural 8 mile bike ride starting at my front door first thing in the morning (weather permitting). As it involves using a bridleway and quiet unclassified roads, I don't see why this would be an issue, but individuals who think like certain members of the Derbyshire police might have a different opinion.
User avatar
al78
Walker
 
Posts: 1407
Munros:32   Corbetts:9
Donalds:1
Joined: Feb 1, 2018

PreviousNext



Can you help support Walkhighlands?


Our forum is free from adverts - your generosity keeps it running.
Can you help support Walkhighlands and this community by donating by direct debit?



Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: malolis and 4 guests