https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-guidance-on-travel-and-transport/'Those who live in a Level 4 area:
- must, by law, remain within that area unless they have a reasonable excuse (see exceptions)
- should stay local and keep journeys within the area to a minimum.'
The exceptions for leaving a level 4 area include escaping injury, illness or harm. Consequently someone whom was suffering acute psychological problems that were alleviated by going up a hill could potentially go up a hill outwith of their own local authority area under the current restrictions, but would have to be prepared to argue their case before a court of law should it become necessary. Which is obviously a classic 'catch 22' as the stress of (or risk of) a court case would probably not be beneficial for such an individuals well-being.
The 'stay local' is a 'should' rather than a 'must' clause and therefore is guidance rather than law and if someone from Wick wanted to go to Ardnamurchan from my reading they could do that legally, but would be breaching the guidance. Consequently it is possible for the police if they stopped you a distance from home in your own LA for them to ask you to return home under the guidance, if you wanted to challenge them at that point as to the law it would be your own decision!
As for staying away from home overnight Mountaineering Scotland (see website in case its changed in the last few days) have said it is permissible to wild camp in your own LA, given how timid they have been hitherto its is unlikely they would have offered this interpretation if there was ambiguity.
Faith groups threaten the Scottish Government with a judicial review on the basis of closing places of worship was a fundamental breach of human rights, hence now they are open.
Unfortunately Mountaineering Scotland were/are too spineless and conflicted to do similar. Not wanting to jeopardise future Sport Scotland funding (are we to assume that is more important to them than members, and members mental and physical well being?), and possibly due to other conflicts of interest. In fact they have said that vociferous campaigning would not be in members interests!
So now we have the situation that 50 people can meet inside a church, presumable as 'the Lord will protect his flock', yet many of us can't even go up a hill, and Mountaineering Scotland have essentially said diddly squat.
Scientifically its been known for nearly a year that the risk of transmission is very, very low outdoors (apart from essentially mass gatherings), transmission is dominantly driven by indoor interactions, analysis of viral genomes from last summer showed that there were no significant transmission from tourists to the local Highland populations, the Local Authority Boundaries being used were never devised for the purposes of infection control, restrictions on civil liberties are meant to be proportionate to risk, and if you are prepared to threaten legal action to the Scot. Gov. exceptions will be made, or if you are a vote winner like hairdressers you will be exempt from the basics of indoor close proximity for a protracted period = bad.
Yet have we heard Mountaineering Scotland raising our cause about the arbitrary nature of the boundaries, the safety of being outdoors, the lack of transmission risk to local populations, the disproportionate nature of the restrictions versus risk etc?
While I am very annoyed at the Scot Gov. and Holyroods Members in Opposition for lack of critical thought and failure to understand and differentiate on the basis of the difference between outside and inside transmission risk, and can forgive Mountaineering Scotland for their approach through last springs lock-down (it was after all relatively uncharted territory), I am absolutely livid at their clear, apparent and deliberate failure to champion our cause through this current period. After all thats what they are there for, to represent us.
Are you feeling effectively represented - I for one am absolutely not?
May be a subject for another thread.