If we close up for a bit...

[Cheeky Monkey]

James - indeed

Though in "normal" times it might make the forum a bit dull

[RIP]

For me it's still about risk of additional stress on the health system.

[edit: CharlieC said similar things while I was typing the following. I'm trying to work through the detailed logic of justification though ]

Now we're allowed 'unlimited' exercise that surely covers the 'biking' part of bikepacking. We can even have a mate along - although I'm not clear if this is the same person every time, or one different person each time, is it specified somewhere? Surely the latter?. So 'being seen' or 'setting an example' are no longer an issue.

So we've now got to justify the 'bivvy' part. And Richard's point is the one that's still stopping me. Sean et al also make the same point eloquently and I think it's great that we have their restraint in the discussion.

As I pointed out earlier there's many risks sleeping at home - falling out of bed, falling downstairs, being attacked by a robber, fire from electrical/gas malfunction, etc. Conversely outdoors there's widowmakers, lightning, and the odd man-eating tiger depending on where you live.

So is it now a question of saying that the risks of a particular bivvy situation must be no worse than sleeping at home? What are the combined severity/probability/outcome of each set? If you think the bivvy ones are not greater than the home ones then off you go.

Having said that, there still remains the issue of rescue. Even if you think the risk likelihoods are low, having to be rescued off a mountain is going to cause much more of a problem to others and the NHS than an ambulance turning up at your house. A very high embarrassment factor too.

So, then, how about if you ride on non-technical ground to a spot not too far from home, where a rescue would not involve Mountain Rescue, helicopters etc, with a mate (kipping 2m away) who could also help, is that now OK? (Interestingly, this is sounding like I'm lifting this risk assessment straight out of my British Cycling coaching manuals!)

"Is It Alright If".......

[Bearbonesnorm]

but if some managed to get past the idea that every damn thing needed sharing online we might be in a better place after all this.

I'm assuming people read their last newsletter?



I'm potentially far more of a burden to the NHS while at home than I am sleeping outside (trust me) but no one knows whether I've slept outside twice, ten times or twenty times in the last six weeks. I have said before that I believe 20% of people who go bikepacking wouldn't go if they couldn't share it afterwards ... quite obviously, kipping in your back garden falls well within any guidlines and is something that should readily be shared.

[BigdummySteve]

Although I’ve just taken delivery of my Altaplex I think I’ll wait a while to make a decision. My feeling is that a gentle ride and stopping over night somewhere secluded is FAR less risky than going to the supermarket. People are being encouraged to return to work, if it’s OK to take, which for many will be a greater risk for the economic good I feel an overnight trip is OK.

We have to remember the purpose of these measures, in normal circumstances the restrictions on our personal freedoms would start riots. The vast majority of people have complied with the restrictions, hopefully out of a sense of common good rather than fear.
For me it’s becoming clear that a return to ‘normal’ is a very long way off. We’re in this for the long haul and while we gently return from lockdown common sense Is going to be needed.

[BigdummySteve]

kipping in your back garden falls well within any guidlines and is something that should readily be shared.

And I may well kip in the garden again, but I look at the government sending working class people back into employment and it does change my perspective. If it’s safe for factory workers to resume their jobs surely sleeping in a remote wood poses no risk.

The balance between economic good, safety and returning some personal liberties is going to be very tricky.

[RIP]

Hmm, I'm going to qualify my previous ravings. Having tried to claim that there's now less of a problem with the 'setting an example' angle, that's only true if we're not trying to 'see how much we can get away with within the apparent rules'. Which I partly am of course, even if it's only at this discussion level at the moment rather than me actually doing it.

Our Rule #1 generally puts us on the side of restraint with this current situation. Although it's a bit ironic that at the same time we're breakers of what most Normals would think of as, well, normal or sensible .

A mate of Mrs Perrin has said 'oh right we're going to drive to the beach tomorrow then cos Boris says we should' despite the fact that it's 100 miles away.

The problem now is we've gone from 'STAY AT HOME' which is clear and even the thickos think twice about breaking, to something much vaguer which will encourage 'how can I bend this to what I want to do'. So I'm going to watch myself and try and guard against that.

Does a bivvy happen if we don't report it? Does a falling tree make a sound if nobody's there? If we didn't tell each other our bivvy stories This Place would cease to exist so I think we should knock that line of chat on the head .

[Bearbonesnorm]

And I may well kip in the garden again, but I look at the government sending working class people back into employment and it does change my perspective. If it’s safe for factory workers to resume their jobs surely sleeping in a remote wood poses no risk.

I believe that's right Steve ... my point is that no one else needs to know

If we didn't tell each other our bivvy stories This Place would cease to exist so I think we should knock that line of chat on the head

No reason why they can't be saved for later Reg

[RIP]

Yeah good point . Ah, no, hang on. Even if I bivvied but didn't write it up, I'd still be thinking I could have written it up, so I'd still feel guilty and wished I hadn't done it. Heeeelllppppp... this is all too much for a Tuesday morning, should've saved it for Headspinning Cheery Friday... time for a strong brew....

Oh and don't think I didn't notice the lower bound of your ".... or 10 or 20 bivvies in the last six weeks"

[Lazarus]

A sensibly planned, local, rural bivy should present as good as zero additional risk to you or anyone else, compared to staying at home (and significantly less than going to the supermarket or even a popular park).

so would driving 200 miles to see my mum but if everyne does it that is where the problem start, Its not is it a big deal if i break the rules, as long as everyone else does not, as i am one person. However if we all break the rules then it is a big problem - this is a case of us neither being told we can or we cannot so we can make our own call . For example i have had not problemfindign space in the park to play footie with the kids - with picninc and sunbathing i very much doubt this will be posssible in the future - ar we selfish for wanting more space for an hour or are they more selfish for wanting to be there for 12 hours?

Might the act of doing so contribute to others making bad decisions about how they interpret the guidance? Possibly. But not if no one sees you.

are you really suggesting this entire debate is not affecting anyone and no one is seeing it ? - as far as i can some want i collectve permision to do it whilst also not telling anyone we are doing - the fact you dont want to publicise it says how allowable you really think it is - I may as well have a secret party and not tellanyone and retend it is both ok and never happened.

As noted the ENGLISH change due to the "clarity" of the PM means lots of things are now down to your "common sense" which experience has taught me is neither that common nor is there much agreement. Actual guidelines with rules are required as we will all interret them how we like

Ie previoulsy it was essential only so some decided a training plan during lockdown was essential - this vague nonesense will just make everything worse as no one is very clear about what we can and what we cannot do - in england
Will I bivvy - i very much doubt it but the bivvy would be the safest part of the bike ride so I can see why somewill.

EDIT: Sorry its a bit long - getting a bit bored here

[RIP]

Might the act of doing so contribute to others making bad decisions about how they interpret the guidance? Possibly. But not if no one sees you.

are you really suggesting this entire debate is not affecting anyone and no one is seeing it ? - as far as i can some want i collectve permision to do it whilst also not telling anyone we are doing - the fact you dont want to publicise it says how allowable you really think it is - I may as well have a secret party and not tellanyone and retend it is both ok and never happened.

You said yourself we're now in a situation of 'vague nonsense', so it's irrelevant that we're 'publicising' our debate here - because of this new vagueness there's a million similar discussions now going on in every household and club in the land and everyone is affecting everyone else, trying to interpret what we're 'allowed' to do or not. The feline is now outside the carrying receptacle. Far from being boring it's suddenly got very interesting exactly because of the new vagueness - WE didn't invent it, we have to interpret it as best we can in our feeble attempts to work out when we can restart our hobby. And bearing in mind there will never be a 'you Boners can now bivvy out' missive, oh and the fact that any discussion of being allowed to do it is a bit much since it's illegal at the best of times anyway! I'm surprised we haven't been cracked down on by the Stasi in the ten years of our existence for encouraging such flagrant and naughty lawbreaking .

So yes there is plenty of mileage in discussing whether it's OK to bivvy privately alone compared to highly visibly sitting on a beach or park bench or having a party with people outside your household.

[Bearbonesnorm]

Implementing a policy of stealth or radio silence isn't an admission of wrong doing, it's simply grief avoidance

[Lazarus]

the fact that any discussion of being allowed to do it is a bit much since it's illegal at the best of times anyway

I will give you that one

I guess the reallissue is everyne will intepret the rules so their thing is allowed and we then dont really have a lockdown. That unfortunately means a more deaths, a new spike and back to where we started - this time probably with an actual proper lockdown requiring permission to go out

[RIP]

Stu: "Policy of stealth" - I'm suddenly feeling quite the opposite now - I want to jump up and down like Michael Palin's peasant in Holy Grail: "help, help, I'm being repressed!". "I've just bivvied and it's my right as one of the great downtrodden unwashed masses!".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtYU87QNjPw

Maybe a better example is Jonesy's 'silent monk in a hole' in Life of Brian: "now I want to shout and sing about bivvying out".

[RIP]

I guess the reallissue is everyne will intepret the rules so their thing is allowed and we then dont really have a lockdown. That unfortunately means a more deaths, a new spike and back to where we started - this time probably with an actual proper lockdown requiring permission to go out

And I'll give you that in return <tiny panda> .

[gairym]

The cynic in me says that they original herd immunity plan to preserve the economy never really went away. It just got unpopular with the general populace for a while so they hid it behind some very wishy washy guidance that was a lot more restrictive than the actual law. After 6 weeks of that they’re just going a step further back towards the original plan.

I've been saying this since the UK's 'lockdown' began.

Makes sense of a few of the less comprehensible decisions/announcements.

[Cheeky Monkey]

Feels a little like groundhog day on this thread.

I think the intention of the continued restrictions is to keep people returning home every night. I also note the campsites (I know we're the antithesis of such glamping, but there's an equivalence, at least in my mind, a bit) are all still closed. In a way that suggests "no" to me.

Honestly though, I think the odd brief bivi involving relatively local ambling would be fine* and irrelevant in the scheme of Covid-19 management and prevention. It might even be permissible / justifiable / wrangle-able under the current "rules".

I'm unsure whether I will or might but would quite like to.






* one person's fine probably very different to anothers, blah blah blah

[voodoo_simon]

To change direction...

My dad has booked Keswick for a week in June/July and the holiday company are doing as much as they can enforce him to pay the full amount (so far he’s only paid 1/3 as deposit), take the holiday (I’m not kidding) otherwise they said they would involve solicitors I mean, WTF, in the same day that the Cumbrian tourist board is telling people not to visit. Shocking!!

[RIP]

Another change....

This might help at least me, and possibly Stu, make more sense out of the revised rules:

"Airthikaypin yoth? Naa then, if thaz bin wokin from om and tha can still wok from om, wok from om. If tha cant wok from om an thi gaffa sez thackan gutta wok, an t'other ayf can watch kids, gutta wok but guh steady gerrin theya. Tha can goo aht t'waak thee mutt for us long us tha wants us monny times us tha wants us long us tha steers clear on fowk. If thaz gorra mask weer it t'shop. That's it fer naa, gerron wi it".

[Jurassic]

I know non of us are thinking about going to the Lakes and walking up Coniston Old Man but this is food for thought and reinforces some of the points that have already been made.
https://www.facebook.com/ConistonMounta ... __tn__=K-R

[Bearbonesnorm]

"Airthikaypin yoth? Naa then, if thaz bin wokin from om and tha can still wok from om, wok from om. If tha cant wok from om an thi gaffa sez thackan gutta wok, an t'other ayf can watch kids, gutta wok but guh steady gerrin theya. Tha can goo aht t'waak thee mutt for us long us tha wants us monny times us tha wants us long us tha steers clear on fowk. If thaz gorra mask weer it t'shop. That's it fer naa, gerron wi it".

Perfect sense Reg

[Lazarus]

re mountain rescue i expect a glut of visiters who have bo experience of the outdoors and will just go because they can and they are bored
I certainly wont be picking a gnar fest route if i go but i will decide on that next week

[whitestone]

re mountain rescue i expect a glut of visitors who have bo experience of the outdoors and will just go because they can and they are bored
I certainly won't be picking a gnar fest route if i go but i will decide on that next week

I had a phone call the other week with the head of Keswick MRT about Lakes activities. His team was down 40%, about half were self-isolating because either they or a dependant were at risk and the other half were front line medical and emergency personnel.

I can't imagine any of the other teams being much different.

[Lazarus]

aye its a not well thought out policy degenerating slowly into an unworkable dangerous mess [like herd immunity] - credit where its due at least the govt have been consistent throughout this as the death rates demonstrate so tragically

I certainly wont be taking the FS up to the lakes and going crazy - i may even stick to BW

[Jurassic]

Imho the "it's okay to drive any distance to access the great outdoors" message is pretty irresponsible of the government. "It's okay to drive to access the great outdoors within a 50 mile radius of your home address" would have been far more sensible and respectful to the residents of areas of natural beauty, National Parks etc.
Cumbria has some of the worst infection figures in the UK with relatively few resources to manage them and now all of a sudden it's okay for anyone to go there and potentially burden the system even more? BoJo's appeal for common sense clearly doesn't apply to his own advice and guidance.

[fatbikephil]

I don't know what we are worrying about, you can still fly and it was never banned throughout the whole lockdown. Given that it was international flights that caused an epidemic to be a global pandemic this was ludicrous. I guess the various governments felt that stopping people from flying would cause terrible upset...... Well what do you know.

So get out on your bikes and enjoy it chaps as the chances of it causing further spread of the virus will be zero, unlike many other things that are allowed. Hopefully us in Scotland won't be far behind, now that Nicola has made her point.