[Andy F]

Good news plastic lovers. You can get your fix from the 25th.

[mark20]

Good news for rock lovers too

[tomtom]

Good news for rock lovers too

Yup. Less crowded at the crag 👍👍👍

[fatneck]

Be interesting to see if the guys who've been getting out for the first time during shut down continue getting out or retreat back indoors. Based on the guys I know, I suspect the former!

[tomtom]

Be interesting to see if the guys who've been getting out for the first time during shut down continue getting out or retreat back indoors. Based on the guys I know, I suspect the former!

The lure of nice coffee and parkour problems might prove greater than dank gritstone quarries :D

[Anti]

Was chatting to a friend about this a few days ago, seeing how it's being done in other countries (booking time slots etc) and us both having our own woodies now I can see very few times I can be arsed to go through the effort of going to the wall. If it's raining - board. If it's not raining - rock.

It's a shame, because I enjoyed my local wall when it's grim and I can spend all Sunday there or something, it had good scenes and a good atmosphere, but that'll be gone anyway I suppose.

[teestub]

I can see very few times I can be arsed to go through the effort of going to the wall. If it's raining - board. If it's not raining - rock.

It's a shame, because I enjoyed my local wall when it's grim and I can spend all Sunday there or something, it had good scenes and a good atmosphere, but that'll be gone anyway I suppose.

I reckon a lot of people are feeling like this mid summer, but come mid winter when we are into our 12th straight week of rain, a change of scene from the board might be pretty enticing!

If anyone is keen to support their wall, but sufficiently risk averse not to be heading back any time soon, then it could be a good time to buy a punchcard to use later in the year so the wall gets the financial boost it needs now.

[Coops_13]

I had my first visit to a local wall last night. Had to reserve a time slot (ended up climbing later than I'd liked) and had to wear a mask throughout. It was really good to be back indoors again and I look forward to doing it once a week. Wearing a mask while climbing though was the biggest ball-ache - gets so hot...

[Oldmanmatt]

Struggling with the mask thing, strictly speaking they are not “required”, but I really think they should be used.
Thoughts?

[Fultonius]

Struggling with the mask thing, strictly speaking they are not “required”, but I really think they should be used.
Thoughts?

Surely it's got to be a risk based thing:

• If you, or others are isolating - no access
• If you are "at risk" - probably shouldn't be going to the wall
• Wash hands before & after
• Employ good climbing hygiene "no touching face/sneezing/coughing etc.
• Regular (Daily? Hourly? disinfecting of holds)

The way I see it you are: a) trying to reduce the likelihood of anyone with Covid being there in the fist place
b) protecting staff & climbers by reducing risk of spread (above measures)
c) Doing your best to stay afloat

You're never going to be able to eliminate the chance of someone pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic climbing. Will the wearing of masks help this? Probably/possibly. Is it a proportionate response? That's the million dollar question.

I think it makes sense in the context of general shopping - as there will be a higher percentage of "at risk" people going, but in a climbing wall - climbers are already accepting an increased risk of contraction by going. I'd say "recommend, but not mandate", but I'm sure others with have different opinions.

[Ged]

You could argue that if we're at the stage where masks are making a difference, the wall shouldn't be open. Of course we don't usually know we're at that stage until it's too late.

The evidence behind cloth masks is pretty flimsy at best, so add in people breathing heavily and bring there for a long time, it's hard to see how they'd make a massive difference if people are asymptomatic

[Oldmanmatt]

You could argue that if we're at the stage where masks are making a difference, the wall shouldn't be open. Of course we don't usually know we're at that stage until it's too late.

The evidence behind cloth masks is pretty flimsy at best, so add in people breathing heavily and bring there for a long time, it's hard to see how they'd make a massive difference if people are asymptomatic

I think your info is out of date:

https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/set-c/set-c-facemasks.pdf?la=en-GB&hash=A22A87CB28F7D6AD9BD93BBCBFC2BB24

[tomtom]

Yup - this is the message that needs to get out - wearing one can save other people not yourself... You are doing a good thing by wearing one..

[Duma]

Real science of sport podcast on masks:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/09kc9g33kpWDycQ1ukkdI0?si=vKbKp2TqSKC0OBh9yM2-7g

[ali k]

Yup - this is the message that needs to get out - wearing one can save other people not yourself... You are doing a good thing by wearing one..

I’d turn this sentiment around and say you’re being selfish by not wearing one. Expecting other people to wear one to protect you and your family but not willing to do the same in return.

[dr_botnik]

Struggling with the mask thing, strictly speaking they are not “required”, but I really think they should be used.
Thoughts?

I'd say yes for the staff, no for the punters. But have public messaging encouraging people to wear one whilst belaying. Maybe even make it a requirement to wear one on the way in and in the changing areas, but not to be fussy about having one on while climbing/on the mats between goes.

[mrjonathanr]

Maybe even make it a requirement to wear one on the way in and in the changing areas, but not to be fussy about having one on while climbing/on the mats between goes.

This seems a compromise. I suspect the key things isn’t masks, it’s ventilation, as aerosols will build up over time anyway. Sort the ventilation out, even planning slots to open all the fire doors might help.

[TobyD]

I had my first visit to a local wall last night. Had to reserve a time slot (ended up climbing later than I'd liked) and had to wear a mask throughout. It was really good to be back indoors again and I look forward to doing it once a week. Wearing a mask while climbing though was the biggest ball-ache - gets so hot...

Imagine what its like wearing one for 10 to 12 hours on a 28 degree ward.

Struggling with the mask thing, strictly speaking they are not “required”, but I really think they should be used.
Thoughts?

Surely it's got to be a risk based thing:

• If you, or others are isolating - no access
• If you are "at risk" - probably shouldn't be going to the wall
• Wash hands before & after
• Employ good climbing hygiene "no touching face/sneezing/coughing etc.
• Regular (Daily? Hourly? disinfecting of holds)

The way I see it you are: a) trying to reduce the likelihood of anyone with Covid being there in the fist place
b) protecting staff & climbers by reducing risk of spread (above measures)
c) Doing your best to stay afloat

You're never going to be able to eliminate the chance of someone pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic climbing. Will the wearing of masks help this? Probably/possibly. Is it a proportionate response? That's the million dollar question.

I think it makes sense in the context of general shopping - as there will be a higher percentage of "at risk" people going, but in a climbing wall - climbers are already accepting an increased risk of contraction by going. I'd say "recommend, but not mandate", but I'm sure others with have different opinions.

Yes. I really can't see how you would disinfect holds, I think this is impractical. Touch is only a risk if you touch your nose or mouth afterwards.

I'd suggest that insisting people wash hands on the way in, improve ventilation and limit numbers.

[Oldmanmatt]

Maybe even make it a requirement to wear one on the way in and in the changing areas, but not to be fussy about having one on while climbing/on the mats between goes.

This seems a compromise. I suspect the key things isn’t masks, it’s ventilation, as aerosols will build up over time anyway. Sort the ventilation out, even planning slots to open all the fire doors might help.

I’ve spent large chunks of my life designing ventilation systems for a variety of situations and have just redesigned and built the ventilation for my wall. To achieve what you seem to envision, by ventilation alone, you’d pretty much have to have each climber in a “booth”.
The rather simple layout in the bouldering room at the Bunker (the wall is wrapped around the perimeter of the mats) means I can create a favourable air flow by using fans to push air downwards over the center line of the mats, outwards towards the walls and it should then flow up towards the extraction in the ceiling. Fresh being drawn in from the entrance area, because the matted area is negative pressure.
But, that’s really just a “general” flow,  in reality, without physical barriers, there’s an almost incalculable number of things that will screw up that flow (not least, bodies moving and breathing) and dead spaces (under the roofs) etc.

Don’t think this isn’t true outdoors, by the way. If you’ve ever paid attention to the way the air moves on a foggy/misty day around obstacles etc. A “still” day outdoors at a crowded crag will leave you breathing somebody else’s expired gases.
I mean, have you ever tried to find the smoke free spot around a campfire, on an evening with even the lightest breeze?

Making people wear masks, at all times, provides those individual “booths”, or a reasonable facsimile of.

The logic of it doesn’t bother me. 

I can’t imagine asking/insisting that people to do it.

I have absolutely no issues about doing all kinds of strenuous shit, in all kinds of restrictive face coverings, because over the years my work has called for exactly that. However, my partner is, absolutely, claustrophobic and gets stressed just wearing a cloth mask in a shop.

Please note, I have glossed over some fairly complex considerations above.

[sdm]

Surely it's got to be a risk based thing:

• If you, or others are isolating - no access
• If you are "at risk" - probably shouldn't be going to the wall
• Wash hands before & after
• Employ good climbing hygiene "no touching face/sneezing/coughing etc.
• Regular (Daily? Hourly? disinfecting of holds)

The way I see it you are: a) trying to reduce the likelihood of anyone with Covid being there in the fist place
b) protecting staff & climbers by reducing risk of spread (above measures)
c) Doing your best to stay afloat

You're never going to be able to eliminate the chance of someone pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic climbing. Will the wearing of masks help this? Probably/possibly. Is it a proportionate response? That's the million dollar question.

I think it makes sense in the context of general shopping - as there will be a higher percentage of "at risk" people going, but in a climbing wall - climbers are already accepting an increased risk of contraction by going. I'd say "recommend, but not mandate", but I'm sure others with have different opinions.

How much increased risk do you think is acceptable to impose on the staff?

They haven't chosen to be there and they are the ones who are there all day and are at the highest risk. Choosing not to do the bare minimum to protect them by wearing a mask seems incredibly selfish.

My problem with the argument that everyone should accept a certain level of risk is that not everyone is in the same situation and therefore not everyone can afford to accept the same level of risk. But the person who chooses to accept the highest level of risk imposes that same level of risk on everyone else they come in to contact with.

If one person decides it is an acceptable risk for them to climb without wearing a mask, they
a) impose the increased infection risk on all staff and
b) exclude other people from climbing indoors full stop if they are not able to accept that increased risk.

[Oldmanmatt]

How much increased risk do you think is acceptable to impose on the staff?

They haven't chosen to be there and they are the ones who are there all day and are at the highest risk. Choosing not to do the bare minimum to protect them by wearing a mask seems incredibly selfish.

My problem with the argument that everyone should accept a certain level of risk is that not everyone is in the same situation and therefore not everyone can afford to accept the same level of risk. But the person who chooses to accept the highest level of risk imposes that same level of risk on everyone else they come in to contact with.

If one person decides it is an acceptable risk for them to climb without wearing a mask, they
a) impose the increased infection risk on all staff and
b) exclude other people from climbing indoors full stop if they are not able to accept that increased risk.

Can I pinch that?
Very succinct.
For us, the decision will rest with directors and staff, together, unless the big boss overrules all, which she might.
Ultimately, which ever way we go, it means us imposing an environment on somebody.

My current thoughts:

Because wearing a mask to protect yourself is not equal to wearing a mask to protect others, and therefore the allowance of choice as to wearing a mask for either reason is not as effective as mandate to wear masks at all times, I lean to a blanket mask at all times.

Aerosol and droplet transmission and motion are very different. If aerosol transmission at low concentrations/exposure times is proved common, then any activity indoors without individual booths, is not viable.

[sdm]

Can I pinch that?

Of course.

For us, the decision will rest with directors and staff, together, unless the big boss overrules all, which she might.
Ultimately, which ever way we go, it means us imposing an environment on somebody.

My current thoughts:

Because wearing a mask to protect yourself is not equal to wearing a mask to protect others, and therefore the allowance of choice as to wearing a mask for either reason is not as effective as mandate to wear masks at all times, I lean to a blanket mask at all times.

Aerosol and droplet transmission and motion are very different. If aerosol transmission at low concentrations/exposure times is proved common, then any activity indoors without individual booths, is not viable.

If we learn that aerosol transmission is high risk, all indoor activity will be high risk regardless of control measures until we have a vaccine or a helpful mutation.

[mrjonathanr]

To achieve what you seem to envision, by ventilation alone, you’d pretty much have to have each climber in a “booth”.

I didn’t envisage anything beyond improved air flow? Sounds like you have a good plan.

[Oldmanmatt]

To achieve what you seem to envision, by ventilation alone, you’d pretty much have to have each climber in a “booth”.

I didn’t envisage anything beyond improved air flow? Sounds like you have a good plan.

It wasn’t written as grumpily as it reads...

I did get a little grouchy, when sketching out hypothetical flows, because everything screws up everything else. Trying to ventilate a specific point in open space, without physical barriers, sucks (excuse the pun).
 I abandoned initial, fancy, solutions as impractical and ended up with  “pump lots of it out, drag it in from a known place and try not to cross over too much”.

[Fultonius]

How much increased risk do you think is acceptable to impose on the staff?

They haven't chosen to be there and they are the ones who are there all day and are at the highest risk. Choosing not to do the bare minimum to protect them by wearing a mask seems incredibly selfish.

My problem with the argument that everyone should accept a certain level of risk is that not everyone is in the same situation and therefore not everyone can afford to accept the same level of risk. But the person who chooses to accept the highest level of risk imposes that same level of risk on everyone else they come in to contact with.

If one person decides it is an acceptable risk for them to climb without wearing a mask, they
a) impose the increased infection risk on all staff and
b) exclude other people from climbing indoors full stop if they are not able to accept that increased risk.

Can I pinch that?
Very succinct.
For us, the decision will rest with directors and staff, together, unless the big boss overrules all, which she might.
Ultimately, which ever way we go, it means us imposing an environment on somebody.

My current thoughts:

Because wearing a mask to protect yourself is not equal to wearing a mask to protect others, and therefore the allowance of choice as to wearing a mask for either reason is not as effective as mandate to wear masks at all times, I lean to a blanket mask at all times.

Aerosol and droplet transmission and motion are very different. If aerosol transmission at low concentrations/exposure times is proved common, then any activity indoors without individual booths, is not viable.

Been thinking a bit about this over the weekend. Went to a cafe on Saturday to get some sandwiches and a coffee, the staff were all wearing masks, but as soon as they went through the back to the food prep area, they all slipped them down under their chins.

I had a look on the Food Standards Scotland website and they say:

13. Scottish Government has suggested that face coverings may have some benefit in preventing the spread of COVID-19. Does this means that my staff should be using them?
On the 28 April, the Scottish Government issued new advice that there may be some benefit for the general public to wear textile face coverings over the mouth and nose to reduce the risk of them spreading COVID-19 to others (particularly when asymptomatic). It was suggested that this could be applied as a precautionary measure in situations where physical (social) distancing presents a challenge in enclosed environments such as public transport or shops. This new Scottish Government advice is based on limited evidence and is not mandatory.

Based on currently inconclusive evidence, FSS considers the use of textile facial coverings, or indeed face masks, to be of limited value for protecting staff in food business environments. Face masks and/or coverings should never be used as a replacement for hygiene and distancing measures in any food business.

In food production and manufacturing premises, FSS recommends that facemasks should only be considered for occasional defined tasks for which additional precautions are considered appropriate. In these specific cases, they must be fit for purpose, and training provided to wearers to ensure they are fitted, worn and disposed of correctly. For further information please refer to our guidance.

It is important to highlight that the new advice from Scottish Government on the use of textile face coverings is not intended as an infection prevention and control measure for workers and therefore does not apply to food businesses.

We are aware that some food retail and catering businesses in which there is a need for interaction with the general public may wish to consider the use of masks, especially when staff are unable to be physically distanced from individuals they do not normally come into contact with. These should be used in a way that is consistent with the business’s health and safety requirements. It is also important to highlight that the failure of staff to wear face masks hygienically and to ensure that they are changed regularly could have a detrimental impact on infection control and food safety.

https://www.foodstandards.gov.scot/consumers/food-safety/coronavirus/questions-and-answers-covid-19#%E2%80%9CScottish%20Government%20has%20suggested%20that%20face%20coverings%20may%20have%20some%20benefit%20in%20preventing%20the%20spread%20of%20COVID-19.%20Does%20this%20means%20that%20my%20staff%20should%20be%20using%20them?

So...clear as mud. I'm guessing if you open with mandatory face coverings, there will be grumbles from a few, but you will be full to capacity and those grumblers will most likely come anyway, or come back when things ease up.

My personal opinion is that face coverings are bullshit to appease people and make everyone feel fluffy that we doing something collectively to combat the disease. Just wish folks would change their habits, lifestyles and behaviours as rapidly and deeply for the much MUCH bigger threat to humanity, ecology and the environment that we have been facing for the last few decades...

1. Virus that is killing a proportion of the population (not good), massive global reaction despite the fact that the vast majority of the world will definitely emerge out the other side relatively unscathed, and, the rest of the planet's ecosystem is either benefiting from, or not even blinking about.

2. Environmental issue that is going to have far-reaching, cross-cultural, multi-demographic catastrophic impacts, and potentially making the planet uninhabitable to humans: meh, too expensive, need oil, must consume. Multiple species extinctions ongoing, looming meltdown of the economies as we know them. Carry on!

But it's ok, we can get back to drinking in pubs and shopping.