Just wondering who'll still go out for a bivvy ride if there's a shut down.

Oooh, I enjoy a good battle...

Self-entitled selfish gets on one side
vs
Judgemental vigilantes policing what we do on the other

Aye, could be taken any way...

I dont know if I actually will, but if I could, then I would.

I suppose if you were doing an overnighter after work then going back in the next morning it's not really any different from going home and back to work. It might need to be a supreme TLS effort though as you'll look a bit of a tool with bags all over the bike if there's been a ban on leisure cycling.

Verdict: unsure.

When I get out I'm usually on my own, tend to be local and don't particularly use cafes etc. On the face of it I don't see how that would undermine things in a significant way. I'm happy to be enlightened or discuss. Anyone that can't do it without the internet equivalent of histrionics should probably expect to be told to bog off

Work have instructed to do so from home wherever possible and I'll stick to that. It's a recipe for a fat, unproductive and bored CM though

In Reverse wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 12:20 pm ... if there's been a ban on leisure cycling.

Boris seems to have shied off mandating bars etc to close so I'd be staggered if "leisure cycling" (love that phrase ) gets restricted.

Roadie peleton packs though, they should be punishable by flogging whatever the wider situation

In the small print of self-isolation it does mention going out for exercise without socialising...

I will carry on regardless. I ride alone all the time anyway.

In Reverse wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 12:20 pm

Verdict: unsure.

This has been added to the poll as depending how discussions go, more people may not be able to decide.

...on my own, tend to be local and don't particularly use cafes etc. On the face of it I don't see how that would undermine things in a significant way.

I'm thinking much the same way. Local overnighters on my tod shouldn't be an issue?
One thing to bear in mind is what might happen if one has an accident/requires assistance.

Personally I will think of the greater good here and take the inconvenience in the hope that it saves lives and that is way more important than a few extra nights bivvying
This will almost certainly be the minority view and this is why the virus will continue to spread. Even at the risk of death some will still value their hobby more than society/others. Its really not the time for individualism and travel and the hils are not going anywhere.

One thing to bear in mind is what might happen if one has an accident/requires assistance.

Best ban all car journeys and maybe stop clumsy people from walking anywhere? No DIY for those people either

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 1:16 pm [... d maybe stop clumsy people from walking anywhere?

Seeing as how we're talking and this is a genuine question BTW. Anyone not going to go for a ride, are you planning on not leaving the house at all? Work, shop, etc? If you are going to leave, then I'd have thought a solo night in the woods would represent a much smaller threat?

If you can be certain that you are not carrying the virus then you represent no threat at all, so all is good.

Except... what happens if you pick up the virus on your travels; maybe off a gate that someone passed through minutes earlier, or a stile, indeed anything that may have been touched by somebody else unknown to you.

Here in Spain there is blanket ban on cycling, except for work and buying food and pharma. The fines for disobeying run to tens of thousand of euros or imprisonment, same for running, skating etc. The logic is not so much risk of spreading the virus but possibly tieing up stretched medical resources by doing an activity that could be avoided. The adage of don't be a dick is pretty applicable here. There's a similar ongoing thread on that shoutier place at the moment which has descended into a bicker-fest about mental illness. A well known owner of a biking business in the Basque country apparently tweeted his intent to have a cheeky ride to do some trail maintenance and was taken apart by his followers for being irresponsible. I suppose the reaction to this pandemic has highlighted stark differences in the psyche of different nationalities.

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 1:34 pm Seeing as how we're talking and this is a genuine question BTW. Anyone not going to go for a ride, are you planning on not leaving the house at all? Work, shop, etc? If you are going to leave, then I'd have thought a solo night in the woods would represent a much smaller threat?

This is tricky. I am potentially looking after 2 elderly neighbours and my son who is now self isolating under doctor's advice.

I 100% see why it is little risk going biking. But I'm not going to as I can't help feeling others will not understand and it may draw cyclist hate. It looks like my two big rides of the year ain't happening either as the travel ban will come in force.

I have to keep shopping for reasons in first paragraph. We are going to massively miss the pub which has become central to our community life. So to answer the question Stu it is going to be sh1te for a few months I suspect. Zwift overload and the occasional walk.

I live on my own, I can go biking on my own, without any form of interaction with anyone else, so the the risk is low. The highest risk is going shopping (just been to tescos and it was mobbed) and they ain't going to stop that. Any journeys I make (for shopping and work) will be by bike or motorbike and I don't see any difference to going bikepacking. The problem we will have is a government who doesn't understand our tiny little world and may introduce a widespread ban on going out for leisure trips without worrying about the finer detail. Also bear in mind that the Police will likely end up 100% on public order issues so there will be no enforcement of any ban in any case.

pistonbroke wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 1:55 pm Here in Spain there is blanket ban on cycling,

I believe its the same in Italy also.

I imagined this question to be based on a basis of a person's choice , rather than a reinforced command. If it gets to the point of enforcement, then the answer is as clear as day.

From STW:

Health experts are not only worried that riders could expose themselves to the risk of infection, but could also injure themselves while riding. At a time when health services are already stretched to breaking point, injured cyclists would be adding to that strain.

Rather spurious logic isn't it?

Hey ho, stay safe and healthy folks.

Edit - dear god I've just started reading the STW thread. Please ignore this / me. It's just not worth it

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 1:34 pm Seeing as how we're talking and this is a genuine question BTW. Anyone not going to go for a ride, are you planning on not leaving the house at all? Work, shop, etc? If you are going to leave, then I'd have thought a solo night in the woods would represent a much smaller threat?

The work thing for me is a bit tricky , you know my trade stu , and my contracts include a lot of food companies, so if we stopped doing what we do then there would be very few deliveries so those people panicking would be right in I told you to stock up , I’m quite lucky as my mother in law passed a couple of years back ( she lived with us)so the only elders I see are still very fit but have kept contact to a minimum, work wise I must visit 12-15 sites per week and have to deal with 40-50 people face to face so I dare say there’s a good chance I’ve either had it or will contact it,but with all the coughs sniffles and aches about this time of year who am I to know, if there wasn’t such a definite threat to the infirmed and older generation my normal attitude would be catch it , get over it and crack on but there is a definite threat to certain generations

A lot depends on what official edicts are forthcoming, though this administration seems intent on avoiding actually making decisions that might have any comeback on themselves. Stay as we are and I'd head out, certainly locally but be subtler than normal about it, but if stricter controls on travel came into place then I wouldn't.

My best guess based on what's being said at the moment and looking at how the rate of infections have changed in places like China then we are looking at a minimum of three months before things start to return to "normal". Given how incompetent officials were during the 2001 F&M crisis (from sequestered veterinary friends along with farmers I know) then I suspect it will last much longer.

Cheeky Monkey wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 2:33 pm From STW:

Health experts are not only worried that riders could expose themselves to the risk of infection, but could also injure themselves while riding. At a time when health services are already stretched to breaking point, injured cyclists would be adding to that strain.

Rather spurious logic isn't it?

Hey ho, stay safe and healthy folks.

Edit - dear god I've just started reading the STW thread. Please ignore this / me. It's just not worth it

When my father was terminally ill he had to be admitted and there was only one bed available in our hospital, this was in the summer and 8 years ago, funding and facilities have been reduced since. The risk is that if I go out riding and do end up injured and in hospital that I'll be occupying a bed so if it does get as bad as it could someone else will be turned away who potentially could have been saved if I wasn't in the bed.

The same logic will I'm sure be applied to lots of leisure activities, as well as the crowds at local football matches on a Saturday I'm sure at least one player gets injured a week, the same for the local rugby. So that's 2 more people taking up time at the hospital. My wife is an assistant in clinical research and she is going to be trained to work on the wards so it appears to be all hands to the pumps.

As for riding, the MOT runs out on my car on Thursday... so if we assume that driving that to the garage for re-test is an unnecessary journey (it failed the test yesterday) then I'll have to ride to work as I can't work from home although getting and delivering my 83 year old mum's shopping might be hard work on the bike

Sean, you must have missed this:

Cheeky Monkey wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2020 2:33 pm Edit - dear god I've just started reading the STW thread. Please ignore this / me. It's just not worth it

The argument is still pretty spurious (actually, I think I mean specious) irrespective of your anecdote, I think. If the purpose of restriction were to reduce burden on NHS then there are a whole heap of activities which have a much higher likelihood of "producing" bed blockers yet they are not currently restricted.

AFAIK current measures are mostly about limiting contact of people to reduce the incidence of illness in the whole population that would in itself overwhelm the health services. Against those sorts of numbers a few injured bikers in beds would be irrelevant.

All said in good humour Mostly opinion and received wisdom

Edit - and my original pique about the line I quoted was that I thought it was lazy journalism / convenient assumption, which bugs me