UKH

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/bmc-launches-covid19-recovery-plan-for-climbing--h...

I like this bit:-

"6. Honeypots
• It is anticipated that the increase in risk of transmission caused by climbers and hill 
walkers visiting more popular venues can be mitigated through advice to avoid such 
places for the foreseeable future, although it is noted that no such restrictions exist for 
walking or cycling."

So all the climbers in the peak have to go to either, Crowden Great Quarry or Bell Hagg and avoid Stanage and Froggatt? Anybody else seeing the flaw in this?

Already bagsied Crowden, sorry.

Before and in case the thread goes off on a massive tangent regarding the details in the document, I would just like to say (as a BMC member) that I am very grateful for this advocacy on our behalf to get us back into the mountains as soon as possible.

People do seem to show an incredible lack of imagination though. Is there anything wrong with encouraging them to spread out a bit? The peak has loads of good, quiet crags but everyone just packs into the same sections of Stanage and Horseshoe.

Hilarious. The outdoors isn't closed, but if it was then it 're-opens' when the government removes stay-at-home orders. It really is that simple, and does not require a phased approach in which the law will have little interest.

The government is expected to make an announcement about relaxing the Regulations on Sunday. The BMC have been speaking to government representatives and this document will have been written with a phased release of the lockdown in mind.

The strategy has also clearly been written as a tool to influence government policy.

Can anyone explain how it is considered easier to maintain social distancing whilst sport climbing rather than trad climbing?

"BMC who?" is what most outdoor people would probably say.

I was once vilified on here for suggesting sport climbing was safer than trad climbing. It seems now (well, when the phases are ‘authorised’) you can repeatedly fall off a sport route all day long but you won’t be ‘allowed’ to trad climb where not falling off is very much the ethic. Realistically, social distancing will go out of the window within 5 minutes of arriving at the bottom of the crag, regardless of the discipline. It’s not human nature. Sure, it’s easy in the supermarket etc, you’re there for a short period amongst strangers. Outside with a mate is a different situation entirely.

Never swapped over on that Little Cham saddle stance?

Perhaps because you're not bringing a second up or sharing stances?

One thing I thought seemed to be missing from the document was anything about multiple climbers using the same holds and passing the virus on that way. Yes it mentions using hand sanitiser but it seemed odd to talk about surface transmission in the context of using gates but completely ignore it in the context of using holds.

This is garbage. It's perfectly possible to boulder completely alone (I did so far more often than with others anyway) and it's possible too to socially distance at the bottom of a crag. Apart from multi pitch trad it is possible to keep away from people. If you can't do it you'll just have to stay at home, but please try not to ruin the possibility for others by either ignoring the guidance that gets issued or nay-saying before it can be tried out. 

I’m not well versed in sport climbing, but ever tried to remove the bottom draw when lowering off when your belayer is stood well away from your landing zone?

Good points re. surfaces.

I've seen several people mention that liquid chalk varieties that are alcohol based (many but not all) might help as a hand sanitizer. Would be interested if anyone could confirm or refute this.

I'll be staying at quiet crags when it first starts being possible to go out though 

Yes no problem re. bouldering.

It is possible too, but accidents happen and you won’t know if you can do until you’ve tried it. All it’ll take is a mindless chucking of a bit of gear, water canister, whatever. It could well (will?) become the norm and muscle memory but those few first days out will be littered with accidental intrusions. 

Thats because they only bought the Rockfax!

Yes, the Government want to *be seen* to be easing restrictions whilst at the same time not doing anything that significantly increases the likelihood of transmission, nor requires a complicated change in the law.

Telling Police officers not to challenge people who are driving to outdoor recreation, enjoying parks, picnics etc is an obvious way to do that (since it requires no actual change to law, just a change to the advice of 'what is likely to be reasonable').

I don't think they need a BMC document to influence that fairly obvious decision, and I'd be more than a bit surprised if anything the government sets out mentions "climbing", let alone specific types of climbing! Though I do look forward to Boris trying to muddle his way through a statement allowing "bouldering but not sport climbing, unless you're with a family member, in which case you can go trad climbing... erm... bluster... bluster..."

I don't disagree that the document may have been 'written to influence government policy'... that was the bit I find amusing

I think it's great to see the BMC doing what it can to influence this issue. I don't think people realise the extent of the resistance we are likely to face from landowners and "locals" in trying to return to climbing. Farmers are already blocking public paths; some residents in the Lakes are taking to Cumbria Police's Facebook to page to rage about their pet theory of tourist infiltrators; and the Welsh government has told us to stay the hell away or face an armed response!

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the outdoor community has become one of the scapegoats for Covid-19 transmission - even though mountaineering activities are highly unlikely to be a significant factor in the spread of the virus. I really do think we will find it harder than expected to "get back to normal".

And that's not even taking into account the debate about whether the Tories are right to start easing the lockdown right now (I don't think so); and the terrible effects ending the furlough scheme in the near future will have on the mountaineering industry who are facing little or no trade, but no furlough money either...

We're actually pretty screwed and the end is not in sight yet. But, at least the BMC is doing something constructive toward defending our interests.

This article is welcome and makes some sense, but there do seem to be flaws. The most fundamental flaw is that having made a good start by pointing out that climbing is perhaps not as dangerous as widely perceived, it is then unfortunate that when describing a possible order of return in recommending various activities, safety appears to take precedence over transmission risk. For instance, bouldering in small groups is recommended ahead of any trad climbing. I think it should be the other way round - any activity in pairs should be considered preferable to anything involving groups of more people. Surely the focus should be to avoid crowds and anything else that increases risk of transmission rather than on the specific type of climbing undertaken?

Also, scrambling is mentioned as ok early on - obviously what counts as a scramble is subjective... Solo rock climbing doesn't get a mention, but I guess it's not an activity that gets wide participation.

I'd guess that this document, which I mostly agree with apart from the phased reintroduction of sport/trad, is probably a few days late. With 3 non-working days to go I suspect it probably won't influence anything.  Although it's good to see some thought about the recovery plan. 

I wonder if UKC should disable the lifts and partner's forum?

All yours pal! 

Less time spent in close proximity at the base of the crag while deciding how many of the 3 full sets of hexes on cord to take for the 8m route?

o Be aware that closures of certain honeypot areas (e.g. Snowdon in Wales) will likely continue even as other parts of the countryside are opened.

Presuming hill walking and travel in general are permitted, how do you close Snowdon in Wales? 

It's important to remember that climbing and hill walking was never banned under the Regulations and that the ban was self imposed by the BMC. What was banned was non-essential travel.

What’s really important to get the mountains open (once the non-essential travel restriction is eased) is to get Mountain Rescue on side because otherwise the Authorities will use them as an excuse to impose their own interpretation of the Regulations and stop people climbing and hill walking because they consider it to be too risky and potentially a high impact on the emergency services and the NHS.

I'm the proposal it said bouldering and hill walking would be acceptable at phase 1. Is that inline with the governments phases of the reduction of lockdown restrictions.....so will that mean we can boulder locally and alone after Bojo's Sunday speech. 

You clip into the penultimate one, your belayer unweights the rope, you invert and grab the first one, and then they take tension back in and you take the second out.

Not that uncommon on overhanging routes where you wouldn't want to take the swing from level with bolt 1.

Massive tangent I realise!

Yes, social distancing for climbing is fine in theory but what about when you have to choose between better belaying/spotting (close in to the crag, sometimes sat on the edge when you're at the top) and keeping apart (standing out from the crag, risking the second penduluming or being pulled off the edge because you aren't sat in the right place at the top)?  

This is the only bit I took issue with too. Struggling to see how lowering down onto your mate's head is more socially distant than topping out and walking off. Multipitch, sure, more of an issue.

Other than that, great to have this document. It's a solid proactive plan to start from full of sensible proposals. Thanks, The BMC.

The Welsh Government don’t want outsiders in full stop and are intent on flexing their law making powers to the full praying on the fears of potential voters in 12 months time in order to secure their votes. 
 

Even as a born and bred local travelling for work it’s  already intimidating enough around the Llyn and Snowdonia with all home made posters and signs telling Jonny foreigner to go home. I wouldn’t like to be a holidaymaker for the foreseeable future. In some areas I don’t think we are far off from the burning down of holiday homes given the language and behaviour of some. 

When you second a route you use the same holds as the leader and take out the gear they’ve placed and then pass that gear back to them at the top possibly in a belaying position where close proximity is inevitable. In sport climbing you can place and strip your own gear and lowering someone onto your head is usually optional rather than mandatory..

I got the impression of some of that in Cumbria too. Early on I had a sign I put in the window of my car saying "local & acting within government guidelines" just incase some idiot wants to make a fuss seeing my car parked somewhere thinking the tourists are invading "their" village

Although definitely recently I think locals have eased back a bit, starting to see more cars pulled into lay-bys and stuff in Buttermere where as the first few weeks there were literally none. Came down Honister on the bike the other day, coming past Buttermere I popped into rannerdale for a look and it was good to see a few more people out, even spotted a wild swimmer in the lake. No one at risk, no one not socially distancing just local people enjoying their local park. Which is definitely better than the fear of being seen people had early on.

I often find it quite strange how little some crags get used despite relative proximity and decent quality climbing. I drove out to the peak a little before lockdown, and due to a few traffic issues I didn't get there until about midday, when it seemed like every man and his dog was there. Despite lots of driving around I couldn't get parked at anywhere I could reasonably climb at (windy conditions). It's put me off really, I'd rather save the petrol and go to somewhere a bit more local. 

Completely ridiculous. It just means that in 'early phases' the sport crags will be horrible and busy, actually with a greater infection risk, for no good reason, as they admit right there that the injuries for trad are very very small.

Surely that's a feature of multi-pitch climbing whether it's sport or trad?

You can do exactly the same thing on a lot of single pitch trad with a very small amount of thought.

It's a bit of a worry that it apparently took the BMC a fortnight to write a document to cover an exit from a non-existant ban

Thanks for posting the link. As one of the people who was very critical of the BMC's approach and apparently lack of activity early on, I'm glad to say that it's great to see this document. Clearly a fair bit of thought went into it and on the whole it's all pretty sensible and sensibly written. Could just have been better laid out to make it easier to follow.

I doubt that the powers that be are resting this weekend so I suspect someone in the civil service or even the government will get to read it before the plans are finalised. Whether they will take it on board is a different question.

Clearly SD is not in our nature as climbers but that's because we've never had to think about it. I'm sure that SD is perfectly achievable with sport climbing. There could be very brief periods when people would be within 2m, for example when lowering if the belayer needs to move in to the rock to enable the first draw to be stripped (that new clip stick which can remove a draw would be handy - I might invest in one!). No need to be close when the leader is starting out if you clip stick the first 2-3 bolts, which is sensible anyway if trying to minimise risk. Incidentally, if Covid induced risk aversion leads to more people using clip sticks to preclip at least the first bolt, that would be a good thing.

One idea which isn't mentioned in the paper is that when sport climbing people could do different routes (assuming the first leader strips the draws), which is fairly common anyway.

SD is obviously trickier with trad. Not impossible with single pitch though.

The idea of climbing with only one non-household climber partner is a good one and should be feasible for most people. I hope they allow small social bubbles some time soon.

True, but in the context of UK climbing sport almost always means single pitch.

I'm not sure how much difference this would make when a) you've both got to handle the same rope and gear (though I suppose you could both use your own draws) and b) it's not just contact between you and your partner, it's contact with others who have done or will do the same route in a short enough timeframe that virus could still be alive. One C19 climber warming up on Consenting at the start of the day could infect the whole catwalk...

I agree good to see local people out and about in their local area but we are seeing more second homes suddenly occupied and having just driven home over Whinlatter I passed two people pulling suitcases up it (heading up from Braithwaite) where are they going, where have they come from? It won’t be long before Buttermere is rammed again and people will still be asking why Cumbria has one of the worst infection rates in England, doesn’t take a genius to work that out.

For once, I totally agree.

In general, people out enjoying the outdoors in beautiful spring sunshine and remembering that life isn't entirely shit - just having a break from the grim reality - is a good thing. It isn't something you should shame people for, leave an aggressive note on their windscreen, dob them into the cops. 

It's absolutely true that not everyone can go wild swimming in Crummock Water. But hopefully everyone can get outside somewhere that isn't completely horrible and feel the warmth of the sun on their skin.

As for the BMC thing... It looks like a lot of hard work and good intentions went into it. But it's not really my bag.

I'm loathe to chip in here, because...well just because. 

I think all of this is pissing in the wind. We're talking here about people who are feeling good, don't have any reason to think they've got the virus, and climbing with other folk who are in the same place (metaphorically and literally). Yes, there is some risk of asymptomatic transmission. But what we need, as a society, to achieve is keeping that R down. There's no cure, there's no vaccine, no one wants to lose anyone dear, but we've got to carry on living our lives.

If what we're doing as climbers doesn't make any material difference to R, then perhaps we don't need to over-think it. We need to use common sense. Have you been in contact with a zombie? Well isolate then. Have you got no reason to think you're an asymptomatic carrier? No. Right, well act according to the level of risk. There is always a risk that you're an asymptomatic carrier. There's also a risk you'll catch it in the supermarket, and then pass it on, but you're still going to go. Life has to continue. Risks cannot be reduced to zero, they should be reduced in the most statistically effective way. There's nothing virtuous about foregoing some fun that didn't have any meaningful risk in the first place. It's pointless!

We've got to come to some way of living with this, because we're nowhere near herd immunity, and life has to go on. Climbing walls are a shit idea when there's a pandemic on, but outdoor climbing? What is the contribution to the local R? Is this really something that needs to be policed? Wash your hands, yeah?

Well, I probably shouldn't have said any of that, but hey ho. But needless misery just isn't something I'm a massive fan of.

I'm not convinced by the whole getting infected from a hold idea. Must be possible but seems unlikely in an outdoor environment on a non-smooth surface (you might say Consenting is pretty smooth but it's not like a piece of plastic or metal - which the virus stays longer on apparently). I'm surprised there haven't been more studies on this (the only one I've read out in the press was a small German one which looked at things like door handles and basically concluded you were pretty unlikely to get infected unless someone who was infected sneezed into their hand and touched the door handle shortly before you did). Rope is more of an issue as people put it in their mouth but you can have separate ropes.

One of the points made in the paper is that at first people should only come for day visits to go walking etc (there's nowhere open for people to stay anyway). Second home owners are a separate issue.

If I tried that, I would probably drown and die. I can just about manage a swimming pool or somewhere with warm water. Do I judge the person who was doing it? Of course not. They probably knew what they were doing. At the very least, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

I agree to some extent. There's only so far you can take this argument as if everyone took that view and ignored the lockdown to do whatever they fancy doing, the epidemic would be back in no time.

As you say, climbing is an outdoor activity, so the risk of transmission is going to relatively low but it makes sense to take steps to minimise this further. For example, only climbing with one other person and only if that person isn't in a vulnerable category and is unlikely to have Covid (eg they are their household members are all working from home).

At the end of the day, there is a clear rule at the moment saying that exercise is limited to household members. I would be uncomfortable with breaking that, though in practice I could easily find someone else who is fairly unlikely to have the virus. Now if we get to a 'social bubble' concept, that would be a whole different ball game. 

As far as the BMC are concerned, they have to be in line with government thinking around SD, so their paper was drawn up with that in mind.

Do you mean crashing into the ground?? That's a bit much IMO

Because while flying through the air screaming "Watch me" Watch the ROPES!", you maintain a good social distance from other plummeters

The plan fails to acknowledge car sharing to the crag, which was once the norm and clearly is not social distancing. Having seen a huge reduction in traffic and associated problems, this plan could contribute to a worsening of both.

My next pick is the apparant ignorance of gear hygiene. In climbing, the mouth is a third hand, used for gear selection, holding the rope prior to clipping and many other tasks. The gear and rope are then shared with the climbing partner, who repeats the process. But we will ignore this because we simply must go climbing. 

That issue of gear in the mouth can easily be avoided by both pairs taking their own rack and rope to a crag.

If the leader stripped the route on abseil there's no risk of the second contaminating the gear either

Well yes, but this is a work around which then limits crag choice and leads to honeypotting. 

4 ropes and 2 full racks carted up to the east buttress?

Those nasty little roadside sport pits will become covid central. 

It limits crag choice a bit but given that travel outside your local area, say 10 miles from your house, may well be limited for quite a while anyway, I dont think this is a problem. 

I think is addressed by suggesting that participation should be limited initially to household and then social bubbles.  The idea of car sharing with someone outside of this is foolish.  

the gear-mouth-partner thing is true but I don't think it's relevant.  Lots of posts focus on social distancing with your partner (discussions about clipping bolts and lowering off and so on). I'd say these are moot points. You have to accept that you are in contact with your partner and that you can't distance from them. The key is limiting the number of partners rather than keeping distance from multiple partners. 

Within a household, mouth contact is mostly OK. However outside of that, would you kiss your mate sniffy dave at each clip? 

No, it specifically addresses it:

"If joining small groups outside of a household group, travel to the access point for the activity should be in separate vehicles until government advice changes to allow sharing, or if public transport is the only option, ensuring all government advice is followed." (Page 3, under the 'travel' section.)

Not terribly difficult to avoid.

Everybody acknowledges that easing the lockdown means some increases in risk. The government is going to be telling us that some degree of increased risk is allowed. The BMC are suggesting how those government changes might translate to climbing, not making their own decisions about lockdown level. If you want to maintain the maximum possible level of lockdown for longer, take it up with the government rather than the BMC.

So only allow climbing with a member of your household I reckon more than half the country’s climbers fall into this category.

I'm probably not open minded enough, nor inclined to kiss Dave on each belay. But I would be content that by limiting my partners to a few, accepting that I would not be distancing from them, that I would lower the risk of transmitting or contracting COVID.

Bubbles of contact not distancing being the next progression. Hence my earlier rather unpopular suggestion that the lifts and partners forum be closed for the immediate future

Yes for sure. The point I was responding to was this:

“Struggling to see how lowering down onto your mate's head is more socially distant than topping out and walking off”

It's worth noting that particpation in all forms of climbing is considered possible for people within a household i.e. for those of us who live with climbing partners, be that spouses, partners or just mates house sharing.

Is there any ice left on the Ben? *

I've read elsewhere that the fishing and golf authorities have been pushing for reopening of their activities and frankly I can't see any reason why not. On my local walks I've crossed a couple of golf courses and thought what would be the increased risk from hitting a ball with stick? Likewise fishing is pretty much social distancing by definition. So good to see the BMC making our case.

I think the problem is going to be the remarkable lack of imagination by so many climbers who never venture beyond the honey pots. At least half the crags I visit have nobody else at them anyway and even if they do how hard would it be find a different route to climb on say Kinder North?

Maybe we could have a big push for people to clean up obscure crags on moorland grit, in the mountains and Lancs quarries for example. Perhaps keeping car parks closed to honey pot crags as an incentive. Could be an unexpected positive outcome from this?

As a total aside, do BMC members really spend an average of £60 per day per weekend visit, not just sometimes but on average? Does everyone stop in B&Bs these days? With large number dossing in vans and spending nothing some folk must really be pushing the boat out to average £60.

* That was a joke

When will I be able to walk to some local bouldering at caley (about a mile away) and do that.

A few weeks ago people said this shouldn't be done due to pressure on a&e rather than due to having to drive anywhere. Interesting how the BMC are now putting out the argument that climbing is safer than jogging, horse riding etc that are all done on bridleways within 100m of caley crag. Not sure those stats add up really as climbing injuries are often more severe than jogging but I still think the chances of me injuring myself are fairly small and I'd never be more than 300m from the main road. 

I'm not going to do it yet by the way, just interesting how this article appears to brush aside safety concerns and pressure on a&e as well as mountain rescue 

From page 2 of the BMC document;

”...rock climbing incidents, 52...in 2017”

I think we can assume that not all will have needed A&E, and even fewer will have required the use of an ICU or ventilator. So the actual impact of climbing accidents on the NHS is negligible. 

How would that be bad now? Walking from home, stick to lowball problems, be discreet? Surely the problems with bouldering are a) social bouldering b) travel c) risk of injury. The only one which applies is c) and surely you can manage that down to infinitesimal? You don't have to be trying psycho above a beer towel. 

If I lived a mile from Caley I know what I'd be doing (but I wouldn't be posting about it on UKC). I'd have camo'd up my pad and snuck through the woods. 

When this all kicked off there was real concern that the NHS would be overwhelmed, but that's turned out not to be the case. There is still an issue that MRT members could be put at risk, and having to disinfect all the kit after a shout must be a mighty chore.  But the reality is that rock climbing accidents requiring hospitalization are thankfully fairly rare. So perhaps this is less of a concern than it was at the beginning. The new proposals advise staying within our limits and minimising risk.

I think it is doubtful that climbing will be specifically referred to in any government announcement (although a Times leader did include it among activities it suggested could resume, so who knows?) so it will be a matter of how or whether it can be carried out under whatever new restrictions the government decides, in particular cocerning gathering in groups, and travel. We are going to have to get used to doing a lot of things a bit differently for the foreseeable future, maybe even permanently.

There is a bigger issue of public perception, and I suspect the BMCs original advice was at least in part a reaction to the public disapproval of those who packed Snowdon at the start of the lockdown. That will be harder to overcome. 

We've put the BMC plan in its wider context in this piece, which also looks at a possible alternative framework for a return to outdoor activity, and thoughts from mountain rescue:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/features/steps_out_of_lockdown_what_nex...

What do you think the real risks of doing it now are?

In terms of catching or spreading coronavirus its about as close to zero as you can get. In terms of having an accident requiring medical intervention it's very low. In terms of placing a strain on the nhs it's even lower.

The risk seems to me to be twofold:

1) If others see you doing it, they may be encouraged to do their thing and if everybody did their thing then lockdown starts to break down.

2) Are you willing to risk a fine? It's only £30 and you don't get a criminal record. You will probably be asked to stop rather than be fined anyway especially as you only live a mile away.

How visible is Caley? It's over 25 years since I was there so I can't remember. That impacts on the likelihood of both the above. Could this be mitigated if you went at 7am or 8pm?

It's between you and your conscience.

And I'll probably be flamed by the UKC coronavirus police for even raising the possibility that you could consider doing this.

As near to zero as is possible.

We really need to be aware of getting things out of proportion.

The document suggests limiting yourself to climbs within your ability. This should reduce the likelihood of accidents and also enable you to climb without any mouth/gear contact if that is a concern. I'm pretty sure my lead grade wouldn't drop much if I wasn't allowed to use my mouth, and if it had to a little this is something I'd happily do if I thought it would reduce risk to myself and others.

Just wait for the chaos when the Welsh and Uk(English if you prefer) take different stances on the easing of lock down. Border checks on the Severn Bridge perhaps?😉

So wheres everyone going climbing on monday? 😉

My understanding is that the Welsh legislation currently in place makes it an offence to be on certain footpaths. Welsh government went a fair bit further than England on that front. I’m on the other side of wales from Snowdonia but I believe our local hills have areas that are currently illegal to access. How that is actually enforced other than the closing of car parks I have no idea. 

I can see no reason why you cant do that right now.

Seriously? You actually can’t see any reason at all?

Staying at home clearly has its own hazards ...
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/may/08/brian-may-hospitalised-garden...

From comments on other threads by BMC staff it’s probably also worth giving a passing thought to risk 3:

Continued access. Who owns the land and are they likely to share your assessment of the risks of your behaviour? Similarly how sensitive is access and is the landowner potentially going to use any examples of “irresponsible” behaviour (regardless of whether they truly believe there are risks) as a reason to close access. 

I don’t mean that as a contradiction to what you said. But might be worthwhile factoring this into crag choices in the near future too. No idea whether that’s relevant to Caley, but I can certainly think of a few places where access arrangements are pretty uneasy and a perceived health risk could be the final nail in the coffin. 

Interesting. I live walking distance from the Welsh-English border. Which rules apply to me - do I go by where my house is, or where I happen to be when accosted?

You almost seem to be looking for reasons for people not to go climbing any time soon. At least that’s how your posts above come across. The BMC’s proposals are sensible and focus on reasonable measures which can be taken to enable at least some people to go climbing. No doubt some people will choose to continue to stay at home or go for a walk instead and that’s their choice. The rest of us are looking at practical ways forward and if that means a bit of SD then so be it.

If we get to a social bubble concept, that would make things a lot easier.

I don’t think separate ropes are actually required. Just use different ends for different people, with a bit of tape to mark one end to avoid confusion. Use gloves to coil and uncoil in that case.

Incidentally, there is no mention in the paper of people using gloves for things like opening gates. To my mind, that’s more practical than using hand sanitiser. Of course the easiest thing is to use an elbow if possible. A small stick, if available,  can also be used to open a latch on a gate. Or you can use a large leaf, if available, to grab the latch (obviously wouldn’t want people to strip a tree of its leaves but it’s an option for little visited areas). Lots of options, though the latter two are more relevant for lowland areas. 

As far as I know the land is manmanaged by leeds city council, all the signs have their logo on. There's a plaque up there saying the land was gifted in 1919 to the people of otley so I would I doubt there are many access issues. 

The rules apply to an area so it’s going to be about where you are at any one point. In theory. It does raise interesting issues though. Llanymynech is a classic example - part of the crag, including the standard approach, is in England but most of it is in Wales. If google maps is correct, most of the Black Wall is in England but a little bit is in Wales. The routes there wander around a fair bit so you could be under different rules on the same route! Albeit that buttress and the sport route on the Red Wall round the side (also in England) are usually bird banned till 30 June anyway, so this is just hypothetical but it does illustrate the point. 

Indeed and I think access / stakeholder relations are the main issue at the moment for those who are ‘local’ and competent. Crags in access land should be fine though. Which incidentally includes places like Stanage. I actually think Stanage and most gritstone edges would be ideal for getting back to trad: no real access issues; car parks away from local villages; lots of well protected routes; single pitch and easy to maintain SD when topping out or, better still, abseil for the gear; not far from the road in the unlikely event a rescue is required. The main issue would be honeypotting but it’s easy enough to go somewhere else. 

The paper has been carefully written and emphasises that there are very few climbing accidents.

I would say if you can walk to Caley and there are no access issues there and you aren’t going to annoy someone who lives next to the crag, there’s no issue with bouldering there as long as you can do so safely.

A few reasons why I haven't been climbing.

1. I usually take the kids out for a walk each day and although I know the 'once a day rule' isn't really a rule I don't want people seeing me going out all the time

2. I'd have to walk most of the way down the main road carrying a pad.

3. About 6 weeks ago there was outrage locally about a couple climbing not far away on otley chevin with photos of the couple climbing thrown all over social media. From the photo it looked like they were toproping a vs. People on Facebook presumed they'd driven miles, no idea if that's true, and also said they were doing insane and bordering on suicidal dangerous sports.

4. A lady on our street sits in the garden asks me where I'm going whenever I leave the house.  She also says things like 'her at no 6 went out three times today' or ' I saw 3 young lads together who didn't look like brothers earlier'.

It appears there's less worry about the nhs getting overwhelmed than there was 6 weeks ago but until I can go out without thinking someone is going to accuse me of being an idiot I think I'll give it a miss. Just not sure when that will be.

Yes, fair point.

Fair enough. I’m not at all familiar with Caley, but thought that point was worth throwing into the mix anyway just as a general consideration

If you have easy access to a local crag and climb well within your abilities I can see little to fret over.

Have you seen any of the really dumb things that people are doing in their own homes in pursuit of a bit of social media fame

The best thing to do with people like that is to spoonfeed them with increasingly outrageous stories until everybody sees them for exactly what they are

Standard gloves don't work.  You touch the contaminated surface then the outside of your glove is contaminated.  If you keep the gloves on then you are quite likely to touch your face with the contaminated surface of the glove.  If you take the gloves off you need to be really careful about not touching the potentially contaminated outer surface when removing them and you need to throw them away, if you stuff them in your pocket you'd be potentially contaminating everything in the pocket and making it likely your hand would get contaminated next time you put it in your pocket.   

You can clip outdoor gloves to the outside of your rucksack and put them on when needed. I don’t think it’s too hard to put gloves on / take them off without touching the bits that might be contaminated (I mean outdoor gloves with a decent sized cuff). Also at the end of the day it’s not like the gate or whatever is going to be smeared in the virus. It’s about taking an extra precaution to mitigate an already relatively low risk. Plus general good hand hygiene, in particular using hand sanitiser before eating your sarnies and washing your hands upon getting back home (or better still upon getting back to your car/van). The other consideration is that most hill walks and crag access routes involve no or just a couple of gates. It’s more of an issue for lowland walks, as well as some crags.

Make a break for the border.......although you might get wet swimming the Wye.

Exactly. Another example of people losing perspective, it seems folks think everything in the outdoors is covered in a layer of the virus.

Possible reasons why Cumbria has a high infection rate:

1. Poor testing means infection rate figures are deeply unreliable and reflect the limits of government testing more than the realities of transmission.

2. Poverty is very high in Cumbria, with it having been reported that child poverty is 'the norm'. People in living in the most deprived areas are dying twice as fast from Covid-19, according to reports: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/covid-19-deaths-twice-as-high...

3. Cumbria has a "super-aging" population: https://www.cumbria.gov.uk/eLibrary/Content/Internet/536/671/4674/6164/6995...

Things that are not a reason why Cumbria has a high infection rate:

1. You saw some git park his car opposite your house and you're sure he was a hiker/second-home owner/foreigner/middle-class idiot from London.

Maybe he had a chance to see his hands and verify he ony had 5 fingers in each?

I've read that the initial cluster in Cumbria was due to people getting back from half term skiing in Italy. Presumably that was identified in early March when contact tracing was still a thing. To what extent this contributed to the current situation as opposed to other infection routes, I don't know.

I can understand some of the justifications behind the suggested phased return (to climbing) but I think, as others have suggested, that this may well cause more problems in terms of viral transfer than it solves. Some areas of the country have a lot more of one climbing type than another. Even in the peak, which has a variety of boulder, trad and sport venues, there are only limited crags offering say low grade sport routes as an example. We risk funneling people into fewer areas and compounding the social distancing issues. It could be the same with popular and accessible boulder spots.

Is trad really more risky than sport or boulder or even scrambling? Do we have the numbers? The first phase options are the only ones where you are guaranteed to hit the ground if you fall. Granted that will be likely a mat bouldering but all know the line between bouldering and soloing is a fine and blurred line. Scrambling, yeah risk of having a fall lower but consequences and rescue options if you do (assuming no rope, remote area) are often far worse. With there generally being a lot more lower grade trad routes it would be a lot easier for people to stay well within their limits as well as being much more spread out over more crags. Limited parking may help some areas getting too busy, but then maybe more folks will chance public transport...   Never simple!

Nope. When the car park gets full they'll park on the verges and when the verges get full they'll park on the road.

I agree. The more I think about it, the less this suggested phased return to climbing makes sense. Take the Avon Gorge, for instance - around a thousand routes, many great trad routes spread out over a fairly large area, so plenty of space. One tiny sports bit with a reputation for being shite climbing, haha, I've never even bothered trying it. Would make no sense at all for everyone to head to this tiny area, ignoring the rest of the cliff.

I feel the suggested phased return has completely the wrong emphasis. We need to be focusing on social distancing, avoiding crowds, minimising travel, other stuff too, like any access issues, perhaps avoiding really remote areas as MRT issues etc. The type of climbing we are doing is at most of secondary importance, behind all the SD considerations. Besides, rightly or wrongly, it's impossible to imagine people following advice such as "you can go climbing if you like, but only if it's 'sport' climbing" - put like that, it's clearly ridiculous.

4. The clamour to play until the final whistle, that busy weekend right at the start of this when everyone could see what was coming. 

BBC says 2,062 people in Cumbria have the virus, out of a population of nearly 500,000.

So 0.41%
 

Not exactly a plague-hotspot/zombie-apocalypse scenario.

Whereas the infection rate in London counting every single case since this started is 0.26% , my Borough which is the 3rd ranked in the country for population density has a 0.17% infection rate, the adjacent Borough on one side, which is the 1st ranked for population density is 0.15%, and the one the other side, which is the 2nd ranked by population density is 0.19%, yet it's the Londoners who are diseased and infecting people willy-nilly somehow.

It's the same old game played over and over. Blame the foreigners, the outsiders, the immigrants, the second home owners, just about anyone but 'yourselves' (That's a 'royal we' not you personally)

Yes - worrying, but not apocalyptic. This is interesting: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-the-uks-true-covid-19-hotspots-revea...
 

I'm not sure of your point.

Here’s the (semi) official French take on different types of climbing.

https://www.chamoniarde.com/actualites/divers/regles-de-distanciation-et-re...

Key points (some of this is only relevant for alpine climbing and ski touring):

- Return to climbing from Monday.

- General French rules limit travel to 100km from home (not sure if that’s radius or distance travelled).

- Climbing only allowed in daytime and all huts including winter rooms remain closed except for emergencies. This will rule out a lot of but not all Alpine stuff.

- In principle, all forms of climbing are permitted, including alpine. Ski touring also permitted.

- Have grades in hand and take care in the mountains as there have been no updates on conditions since March.

- Ideally climb in a team of two. Can have larger groups for ski touring and walking and potentially alpine climbing (eg easy glacier plod stuff?) but pay attention to distancing. At least 1m apart (not 2m) and wear a mask if in a group eg at a summit but try to avoid groups in the first place. At least 5m if breathing heavily. Avoid climbing on the same multi pitch routes as other teams.

- However it doesn’t say you have to keep 1m apart at all times eg belays.

- Wear a mask near others if can’t keep 1m apart or if spotting when bouldering.

- Wash hands or use hand sanitiser between routes / pitches.

- Use gloves for belaying.

- Use separate gear and ropes if possible. Don’t share chalk bags.

- Use liquid chalk if possible. The rationale seems to be that it’s less ‘puffy’ - I doubt any research has been done but I guess a cloud of chalk could mean a cloud of Covid. Something for walls to consider when the eventually open.

This all seems very sensible and reasonable. It’s worth bearing in mind that in practice most French climbing is sport and relatively few people do trad; the ones who do tend to be fairly experienced. Also most of the trad is in the mountains and won’t yet be accessible to many people anyway (need to ski in at the moment). So there is less of a concern around the whole ‘trad is dangerous’ side of things.

Interesting to see that SD is set at 1m, perhaps recognising the lower risk of transmission in an outdoor environment.

France seems to be about a week or two ahead of us in terms of the virus metrics, albeit they’ve had a stricter lockdown so may have emerged a bit quicker than we will. The fact that they’re already permitting this level of activity is encouraging as I’m sure our government is monitoring what’s happening in other countries.

At first sight, this seems a lot more permissive compared to the BMC approach. However the real difference is driven by government rules, in particular the current ban here on exercise with non household members, the 2m rather than 1m SD and less emphasis on face masks (face masks don’t feature at all in the BMC paper - albeit I wouldn’t want to be buying face masks until they are easily available and the NHS have what they want!).

I want to be in Cham more than ever!

The highest incidence is in Barrow in Furness.

Barrow has desperately high levels of poverty, and an ageing population; exactly as your post suggested.

Oddly, Barrow does not have a large population of second home owning, BMW driving, London hipsters clogging up it’s craft ale bars and breaking Lockdown. Perhaps they are not, in fact, the cause? 🤪