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.

Stay at home

Re: Stay at home

Postby Tringa » Sat Apr 18, 2020 10:09 am

al78 wrote:
Jorja the Dug wrote:
mynthdd2 wrote:I'm still one my high horse bemoaning SE England-centric directives that apparently should apply to everywhere else in the UK .... the one size fits all is ridiculous - I can walk remote Northumberland far safer than I would be on Oxford Street or wherever - so why not wander the Cheviots which is 30 minutes from here?


Well, part of it (and I apologise if you're only 30 minutes walk from the Cheviots) is that some driver that's over confident in his abilities on country roads will crash into you, and you'll both need the hard-pressed hospital; and leaving that possibility aside, you might turn an ankle on a pesky boulder, or grassy tuft, and need help getting...home.

;)


I don't buy the "you might have an accident" argument at all. Firstly, the risk of a serious accident on any one journey is tiny, and secondly, the home is not a place of perfect safety. In the UK every year, 6000 people die from accidents in the home (more than three times the number that die on the road), and 2.7 million visit their local accident and emergency department, so staying at home to avoid the risk of an accident requiring medical treatment is not logical.

The real reason it is best not to go to a supposedly remote area is that if everyone gets the idea that is fair game, you have no way of knowing in advance how many others are going to head to the same place as you. It is not all about you when it comes to making decisions that aim to benefit the population, it is about trying to minimise overall population risk, which is what the "stay at home" message is doing.


Very good point about one of the problems with driving to a "remote" area is that others might do it as well and why staying at home is so important.

The numbers who die from accidents at home is far in excess of those killed in road accidents but I think a more useful comparison is with those injured in road accidents.

In 2018, about 1800 people were killed in road accidents but in addition to those deaths almost 161,000 were injured of which over 25,000 were severely injured and all of the injuries put a strain on the emergency services, so anything we can do to reduce this is a good idea.

Dave
User avatar
Tringa
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Sep 2, 2008
Location: London

Re: Stay at home

Postby Sunset tripper » Sat Apr 18, 2020 10:51 am

Moriarty wrote:
A system to control Urban London at one phase of an outbreak will not be tuned to Lairg at a different point, but trying to layer responses would run up against stupidity, malice and selfishness.



The people of Lairg, and the highlands in general are long used to getting what London wants.
As the restrictions are relaxed it will be interesting to see if the same rules apply, regarding layered responses, and we all come out of the lockdown at the same time.

I wont be holding my breath. :wink:
User avatar
Sunset tripper
 
Posts: 2974
Joined: Nov 3, 2013
Location: Inverness

Re: Stay at home

Postby Sunset tripper » Sat Apr 18, 2020 10:52 am

*
Last edited by Sunset tripper on Sat Apr 18, 2020 10:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sunset tripper
 
Posts: 2974
Joined: Nov 3, 2013
Location: Inverness

Re: Stay at home

Postby Giant Stoneater » Sat Apr 18, 2020 10:53 am

Marty_JG wrote:If we're advocating the cotton-wool approach (the Piers Morgan view) to avoid stressing A&E then people shouldn't be cycling for exercise, that's a form of travel with a very high rate of injury; a year back, 100 deaths and 4000 series injuries - far more than hillwalking). Funnily enough, in terms of A&E liability, the car is safer than cycling, motorcycling, Or walking... in the UK a walk is SIX TIMES more likely to kill you than the same length travelled by car.

The risk of catastrophic car injury is truly remote, but if you think you should be diminishing that risk then you should also not go outside to cycle or to walk either.

https://plus.maths.org/content/os/issue55/features/risk/index


I think it was Chris Townsend the long distance walker who had a rather nasty accident a few years ago about 2 months before one of his epic journeys when he fell off the pavement just walking in town and done all sorts of damage and was out the game for about 8 months.
I wonder how many accidents there have been due to all the D.I.Y. going on during the lockdown.
Giant Stoneater
Scrambler
 
Posts: 921
Joined: Aug 2, 2014

Re: Stay at home

Postby al78 » Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:35 am

Cycling does not have a very high risk of injury, the exercise benefits from cycling outweigh the risk of death and serious injury. It should also be noted that almost all the seriousa injuries and deaths to cyclists are from drivers, so the logical approach would be banning private motor transport before banning cycling, taking externalised risk into account.

https://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/road-safety-and-cycling-overview
https://discerningcyclist.com/2020/03/is-cycling-dangerous-statistic/
User avatar
al78
Walker
 
Posts: 1420
Munros:32   Corbetts:9
Donalds:1
Joined: Feb 1, 2018

Re: Stay at home

Postby Driftwood » Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:59 am

Thanks for that link, Al.

I was about to post on those lines - that cycling, and walking, are at far more risk from motorised vehicles (hopefully less so with the quieter roads now) than the other way round, but admittedly couldn't find anything in official statistics. Whether from difficulty analysing those, or reluctance to say what feels fairly obvious. Walking, and cycling, are also a minimal risk TO others, and offer health benefits for those involved.
Being/getting as fit and healthy as practically possible is something positive for your own mental health, and to maximise your chance of shrugging off illness, as well.
User avatar
Driftwood
Mountain Walker
 
Posts: 334
Munros:244   Corbetts:60
Fionas:35   Donalds:27+23
Sub 2000:19   
Joined: Jun 9, 2011

Re: Stay at home

Postby Culardoch » Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:25 pm

A few years ago one of my mates returned from his mountain biking trip around the nasty horrible scary downhill tracks at Dunkeld. No problem but walking along the pavement sans bike he tripped, fell off the kerb and into the path of a passing truck. Fortunately apart from a broken leg and a few scrapes, cuts and contusions :shock: he was fine. Not even a touch of concussion!

Accidents whether by car, bike, foot, crampon, ladder or whatever can happen any time. It's perhaps important to consider that such accidents aren't more likely to occur during the "lockdown". Haven't seen any figures to verify but my guess is that biking accidents might be down due to the lack of traffic.

As none of us are traipsing off to the hills though mountaineering accidents are none existent. See thanks from all the Scottish teams.
Culardoch
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Dec 8, 2018

Re: Stay at home

Postby arjh » Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:36 pm

User avatar
arjh
Wanderer
 
Posts: 157
Munros:116   Corbetts:27
Fionas:14   Donalds:13+8
Sub 2000:11   Hewitts:316
Wainwrights:187   Islands:6
Joined: Sep 5, 2015
Location: Sussex

Re: Stay at home

Postby arjh » Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:36 pm

Double post
User avatar
arjh
Wanderer
 
Posts: 157
Munros:116   Corbetts:27
Fionas:14   Donalds:13+8
Sub 2000:11   Hewitts:316
Wainwrights:187   Islands:6
Joined: Sep 5, 2015
Location: Sussex

Re: Stay at home

Postby Marty_JG » Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:06 pm

al78 wrote:Cycling does not have a very high risk of injury, the exercise benefits from cycling outweigh the risk of death and serious injury.


Driving a car does not have a very high risk of injury either, my point was cycling is six times more dangerous than driving. I agree we should not abandon cycling, however the conclusion from that is we really do not need to abandon the far-lower drisk of driving either.
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: Stay at home

Postby Cairngorm creeper » Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:08 pm

Facebook post today from Mountaineering Scotland clarifies the current position for Scotland.
There's been a fair bit of confusion on social media today following publication of advice to police in England and Wales regarding outdoor access.
For the avoidance of doubt, that advice is specifically for England and Wales. The current advice in Scotland remains as detailed on our website, drawn up in consultation Scottish Government, Scottish Mountain Rescue and SNH.

https://www.mountaineering.scot/coronavirus

Sportscotland The Scottish Government Ramblers Scotland Glenmore Lodge Association of Mountaineering Instructors Mountain Training Scottish Mountain Rescue
User avatar
Cairngorm creeper
Mountain Walker
 
Posts: 716
Munros:147   Corbetts:24
Fionas:6   Donalds:1
Sub 2000:1   Hewitts:15
Wainwrights:9   
Joined: Jun 4, 2013
Location: Grantown-on-spey

Re: Stay at home

Postby Raynor » Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:23 pm

Every bit of information that comes out from the government seems confusing and contradictory at the moment. I feel sorry for the police trying to work out what they are actually meant to be doing.

Today's press conference just stated that councils have been told parks must not be closed and green spaces must remain open for everyone to enjoy as long as they don't congregate in groups. Is he talking about small parks in towns that you can walk to from your home? Or is he saying that national parks must be open? Talk about muddying the waters.
Raynor
 
Posts: 201
Munros:110   Corbetts:8
Fionas:7   Donalds:1
Sub 2000:14   
Islands:4
Joined: Jun 11, 2017
Location: Mid Calder

Re: Stay at home

Postby al78 » Sat Apr 18, 2020 5:15 pm

Marty_JG wrote:
al78 wrote:Cycling does not have a very high risk of injury, the exercise benefits from cycling outweigh the risk of death and serious injury.


Driving a car does not have a very high risk of injury either, my point was cycling is six times more dangerous than driving. I agree we should not abandon cycling, however the conclusion from that is we really do not need to abandon the far-lower drisk of driving either.


Firstly, where is the data which states cycling is six times more dangerous than driving? Secondly, if that is true, is that taking into account only the risk to the driver/cyclist, or does it take into account externalised consequences? A motorist crashing into a cyclist will kill or seriously injure the cyclist, and have no physical effect on the driver, but the casualty is still caused by the driver. If you remove all motor vehicles from the road, how would that affect the risk of cycling? You cannot compare risks without taking into account externalised risk.
User avatar
al78
Walker
 
Posts: 1420
Munros:32   Corbetts:9
Donalds:1
Joined: Feb 1, 2018

Re: Stay at home

Postby ChrisButch » Sun Apr 19, 2020 8:40 am

al78 wrote:
Marty_JG wrote:
al78 wrote:Cycling does not have a very high risk of injury, the exercise benefits from cycling outweigh the risk of death and serious injury.


Driving a car does not have a very high risk of injury either, my point was cycling is six times more dangerous than driving. I agree we should not abandon cycling, however the conclusion from that is we really do not need to abandon the far-lower drisk of driving either.


Firstly, where is the data which states cycling is six times more dangerous than driving? Secondly, if that is true, is that taking into account only the risk to the driver/cyclist, or does it take into account externalised consequences? A motorist crashing into a cyclist will kill or seriously injure the cyclist, and have no physical effect on the driver, but the casualty is still caused by the driver. If you remove all motor vehicles from the road, how would that affect the risk of cycling? You cannot compare risks without taking into account externalised risk.


Cycling forums regularly feature lengthy learned debates on the interpretation of casualty figures, their causes and options for mitigation. Without attempting to summarise the main issues. what it always comes down to is that cycling on public roads is not in itself a dangerous activity, The dangers arise overwhelmingly from the actions of others.
ChrisButch
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Apr 18, 2016

Re: Stay at home

Postby zatapathique » Sun Apr 19, 2020 4:48 pm

Greetings to Scotland from France! Here, it is defined quite clearly what we are allowed to do and what we aren't allowed.
Every time we leave the flat/house/grounds (which we are allowed to only for a handful of reasons), we need to fill in the following form, and sign it with date and time (English text by French government, not my translation. Bolding by me.):

ATTESTATION DE DÉPLACEMENT DÉROGATOIRE

En application de l’article 3 du décret du 23 mars 2020 prescrivant les mesures générales nécessaires pour faire face à l’épidémie de Covid19 dans le cadre de l’état d’urgence sanitaire
Pursuant to article 3 of the decree of March 23rd 2020 prescribing rules necessary in the fight against the spread of the Covid-19 virus

Je soussigné(e) / ) I hereby sign,
Mme/M. / Mrs/M.:
Né(e) le / Date of birth :
À / At:
Demeurant / Current home address :

certifie que mon déplacement est lié au motif suivant (cocher la case) autorisé par l’article 3 du décret du 23 mars 2020 prescrivant les mesures générales nécessaires pour faire face à l’épidémie de Covid19 dans le cadre de l’état d’urgence sanitaire1 :
certify that my travel matches one of the following reasons (check which apply):

[ ] Déplacements entre le domicile et le lieu d’exercice de l’activité professionnelle, lorsqu’ils sont indispensables à l’exercice d’activités ne pouvant être organisées sous forme de télétravail ou déplacements professionnels ne pouvant être différés / Travel between my home and my work, when remote work isn’t an option or work travels can’t be canceled.

[ ] Déplacements pour effectuer des achats de fournitures nécessaires à l’activité professionnelle et des achats de première nécessité dans des établissements dont les activités demeurent autorisées (liste sur gouvernement.fr) / travel to purchase essential goods within the nearest authorized facilities (list available at gouvernement.fr).

[ ] Consultations et soins ne pouvant être assurés à distance et ne pouvant être différés ; consultations et soins des patients atteints d'une affection de longue durée / travels for medical consultations that can’t be done remotely.

[ ] Déplacements pour motif familial impérieux, pour l’assistance aux personnes vulnérables ou la garde d’enfants / Travels for family reasons, to assist vulnerable individuals, or for child care.

[ ] Déplacements brefs, dans la limite d'une heure quotidienne et dans un rayon maximal d'un kilomètre autour du domicile, liés soit à l'activité physique individuelle des personnes, à l'exclusion de toute pratique sportive collective et de toute proximité avec d'autres personnes, soit à la promenade avec les seules personnes regroupées dans un même domicile, soit aux besoins des animaux de compagnie / short travels, close to home, for individual physical activity (excluding group sports or proximity with other individuals), or for walking pets.

[ ] Convocation judiciaire ou administrative / judicial or administrative summons.

[ ] Participation à des missions d’intérêt général sur demande de l’autorité administrative / participation to general interest missions commissioned by an administrative authority.

Fait à / City :
Le / Date: à / at h
(Date et heure de début de sortie à mentionner obligatoirement/ mandatory day and time of your travel)

Signature :


The French text is a bit more precise. We are allowed leaving home for physical activities once a day, for an hour maximum, not more than 1 km from home, not going by bike, and not driving anywhere to start the activity.

The famous maxium of an hour has been subject to debate here on the forum quite a lot. In France, the reasoning is that you wish to keep the number of people that may meet as small as possible, reducing the number of people outside at the same time in the same area.

I live in a very rural area in a village with 540 inhabitants - not comparable to a big city. However, the rules are the same for everyone everywhere. If not, it would be unfair to those living in less privileged areas.

It is eerily quiet outside. Empty streets, empty roads, empty highway. Especially when compared to Germany (I work across the border, and Germany controls whom they let in since 3 or 4 weeks), where there is more liberty of movement.
Gardens have never looked so well tended to.

For now, the restrictions apply until May 11th in France. I hope this whole bs will be over soon and not last unitl 2022 as some scientists already scare us with. On thing is sure however, my yearly trip to Scotland will be canceled this year. Judging from what politicians say, there's now way anyone will be travelling for pleasure this year. :(

The week before Easter, I was sent home to use up my remaining days off from last year. I used them to plan my trip anyway, draw the routes into the maps, find out the travel times from my accommodation to the starting point of each walk, and so on.

I'll wait until the last possible minute before I cancel anything. Just out of defiance. :wink:

Good luck to you all - stay strong, stay healthy. Like everything else, also this pandemic will pass eventually.
User avatar
zatapathique
Mountain Walker
 
Posts: 111
Munros:96   Corbetts:4
Hewitts:19
Wainwrights:26   
Joined: Sep 3, 2014
Location: France

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: No registered users and 57 guests