[Ru]

Here's a go at a summary:

The regulations are too vague to be able to determine what you can and cannot do. They talk both in terms of “need” and “reasonable excuse,” terms that mean different things to different people. Usually in this situation you refer to case law – what the courts have decided the law means – but we cannot, because there are no published cases. The reality is that the courts, at least at the Magistrate's level, would probably interpret the law differently depending on the day to day news, the latest government guidance, etc.

So if you want a definitive answer as to whether you can climb legally, you’re not going to get one, from anyone.

Underneath the “definitive” legal answer is a series of tiers of other answers as to what to what you should do, depending on what you want to risk. At the highest, you could be convicted of an offence for climbing, at the lowest there is some undefinable risk of spreading CV-19. In between those two you could be charged but not found guilty, arrested but not charged, cautioned or fined, pilloried on social media but not cautioned, tutted at, piss off the mountain rescue or piss off a landowner and create access issues. Each of those tiers has a potentially different answer as to what’s acceptable as everyone has a different interpretation of the law and the risks of spreading CV-19.

In terms of not pissing off peers/landowners/social media, these threads (and the ones on UKC) show that the range of opinion spreads from, “no under any circs” to, “as long as I’m not being belayed by someone from a covid ward it’s alright.” So the only safe solution is not to climb, unless you don’t care, or don’t get seen.

If you don’t want to get arrested, try and interpret the Police guidance, but realise that it’s just that and that there is likely to be considerable variation about what any individual officer thinks is reasonable depending on who it is and exactly what you’re doing. The only way to absolutely avoid the risk of arrest is not to climb, but you can envision scenarios where most police officers would think you were behaving reasonably.

Happily the police guidance also seems to be the CPS’ guidance but unhappily it’s not clear whether it’s actual charging advice (it doesn’t read like charging advice) or just someone’s ad-hoc reckon. In any event, it doesn’t really help too much where climbing is concerned.

If you are the BMC, the safest solution is to advise everyone not to climb, as it’s the only advice that definitely avoids all the above risks.

[mrjonathanr]

Since this does not appear to be linked directly, the NPCC guidance document:
https://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/COVID-19/Documents/What-constitutes-a-reasonable-excuse.pdf

[abarro81]

Why didn't they just get Ru to write the article? 

[spidermonkey09]

That was brilliant, thanks Ru. Sounds like a bit of a catch 22 for the BMC to me. That article is shit and poorly written but I can't see how, at this precise moment in time they can recommend anything else. I hope that behind the scenes someone is doing what JB and Stu have hoped for but I am not holding my breath given the furloughing of (presumably) Rob Dyer. That is a shocking decision. Hopefully Dave will effectively be doing this job.

So, way forward. I think we are probably jumping the gun a bit anyway with regards to wanting clear guidance on how we go back to climbing. That said, what are reasonable first steps in peoples minds. For my money if people start going back to work in a few weeks that is probably the time that people could start driving reasonable (that word again) distances to climb on approproate crags (no access issues, able to social distance). If people cant socially distance, then they should go elsewhere. Easy in theory, hard in practice...

[Nike Air]

Why didn't they just get Ru to write the article? 

My thoughts exactly

[SA Chris]

They can't afford his hourly rate!

[tomtom]

"Coronavirus: 'Country trips should be banned' after police lockdown guidance changes"

Rural groups campaigning to make the above happen - rather than a swift U-U turn.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-country-trips-should-be-banned-after-police-lockdown-guidance-changes-11976533

[petejh]

NIMBYism.

However, the advice has angered rural campaigners who say they have received hundreds of messages from concerned residents.

The National Rural Crime Network, National Farmers' Union, Countryside Alliance and the Country Land and Business Association all want restrictions tightened.

I bet they do! If you let them I can imagine some of them would stop you ever returning to muddy their waters.

It is specifically the guidance on length of travel versus length of exercise that is likely to cause problems in the battle against COVID-19..

Are farmers and residents of quiet villages experts in Coronavirus..

[tomtom]

I expect some have shares in drugs companies preparing novel remedies....

[SA Chris]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnishambles

[tomtom]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnishambles

Jesus Christ, see you, you are a fucking omnishambles, that's what you are. You're like that coffee machine, you know: from bean to cup, you fuck up.

:D

[SA Chris]

All hail, the mighty Tucker.

[Johnny Brown]

Ru, can you explain the difference between climbing and cycling? The only difference I can see is that cycling happens to be mentioned as an example of an exercise. Other lawyers have mentioned climbing as a random form of exercise without noting any difference.

[galpinos]

 I am a BMC member, volunteer and think they are a force for the good, even if they’re sometimes an imperfect force for good so this clouds my thinking. However......

What did you expect the BMC statement to say? The government advice is no non-essential travel, exercise locally. The “lockdown” appears to be working but anecdotally (and from contacts who have a more powerful circle of acquaintances) it seems to be starting to slip and the government are scared that the dam will burst. Did you expect the BMC to say, “Sod the government advice, the CPS advice says you probably won’t get arrested/charged so crack on!”. The statement that says this “new” advise does not give us the right to go climbing is exactly right, it doesn’t. It also doesn’t preclude climbing either. They just can’t explicitly say that.

I actually don’t think Will/Pete/Gav doing a bit of bouldering at their local esoteric spot is a problem either. Lucky them. They chose it live where they did for the advantages it brings. The BMC might think that too. However, saying that as a public statement would have been a step too far.

Where the BMC has been poor is in communication (this seems a consistent problem) and not having Rob in does seem a mistake, though that might have non Covid related reasons.

I can only hope that the BMC are working hard in the background, are lobbying those that make the big decisions and that they have an action plan to get us all back out there as soon as is feasible.

I am currently more pissed off at the people using my residential street as a race track (and cyclists obviously).

[abarro81]

What did you expect the BMC statement to say?

"Recent guidance has lead to some suggesting that it may be legal to drive to climbing, and to climb. Due to the grey area of the law here, it's not clear whether this would or would not be legal, and getting arrested right now would be pretty embarrassing. Irrespective of its legality, we suggest that you currently refrain from climbing. Avoiding antagonising stressed and frightened locals and landowners will make regaining access rights in future an easier task."

Something like that? I literally wrote it on the spot, and it's better than theirs. I'm sure with 20 min on zoom with Stu, Ru, JB, Pete etc you could take that and mould it into something more poetic that conveys the important information and resonates with climbers and hillwalkers who are tempted to go out.

[Ru]

Ru, can you explain the difference between climbing and cycling? The only difference I can see is that cycling happens to be mentioned as an example of an exercise. Other lawyers have mentioned climbing as a random form of exercise without noting any difference.

Perception rather than logic.

[Johnny Brown]

That’s what I’d assumed, thanks.

I actually don’t think Will/Pete/Gav doing a bit of bouldering at their local esoteric spot is a problem either. Lucky them. They chose it live where they did for the advantages it brings. The BMC might think that too. However, saying that as a public statement would have been a step too far.

Why? I was passed by a horse rider today. This is not a safer activity, but (as far as i can see) their representative bodies have not rushed to condemn themselves.

It is time this stance was shifting to something more sensible, acknowledging those users that can access low risk areas, and turn the conversation towards longer term strategies.

[Paul B]

Was anyone suggesting that it was 'safer' than [INSERT ITEM HERE] thus OK? 

I can't be bothered to re-read all the posts but I'm pretty sure it was something along the lines of:
"feels generally safer (for instance with less traffic*) and can unequivocally be undertaken by the majority without the need for travel (so no need to define if that travel is reasonable) and with virtually zero chance of breaching social distancing (e.g. in isolation) requirements (i.e. no impact on R0)."

I'm not going to quote Stu's same post for a third time. If you re-wrote the above but regarding climbing, it'd have the word minority in it, wouldn't it?

*this may or may not be true (black Audi/BMW factor)

EDIT: to clarify, after watching Stu's toy model videos a while back, I see someone going for a ride as a little blob smashing around outside of the model extents with the freedom not to interact with anything (i.e. all the room in the world). Similarly, I see someone going esoteric bouldering as someone visiting a little box outside of the model extents. The difference (in my head) is that as the box becomes less esoteric, more people will visit and you'll fail to apply SD measures. The same is true if you put a load of cyclists in a park in a city (where there's not the room to avoid each other). Barrows suggested a car is the same as a bike, which it is, if your sole purpose is to drive in a loop and not interact with anyone. Usually it isn't and there's a purpose to the visit (i.e. driving between the many boxes representing communities). Apart from putting my feet down I don't get off to take a p*ss (better not share my bar tape).

[gme]

What did you expect the BMC statement to say? The government advice is no non-essential travel, exercise locally. The “lockdown” appears to be working but anecdotally (and from contacts who have a more powerful circle of acquaintances) it seems to be starting to slip and the government are scared that the dam will burst.

Is it starting to slip? I dont see evidence of that here. My business, like many others is starting to get people back to work in very limited numbers, which may to the eyes of some people look like we are ignoring advice, but we have risk assessed everything and are happy we are complying to regs.

The difference with the climbing thing is we (climbers) have chosen to interpret the guidance as requiring us to stop, this needs to change and i would like to see the BMC doing like businesses have and risk assess the possibility of spreading Covid via climbing (minimal if any) and use that to get the crags open.

The argument about potentially having to use the NHS/ MR/Police services if you have and accident is bull if they let people ride bikes and horses.

[IanP]

Ru, can you explain the difference between climbing and cycling? The only difference I can see is that cycling happens to be mentioned as an example of an exercise. Other lawyers have mentioned climbing as a random form of exercise without noting any difference.

Perception rather than logic.

Possibly to some extent but climbing takes place on a limited number of venues so in some ways is more similar to say tennis or children's playgrounds when it comes to social distancing.  We need to come up with a solution that would take this into account and I'm not sure the'obscure venues' solution helps - if we all go to obscure venues then it will be even worse since by there nature they often tend not to be very big. 

For any particular individual (or household group) there's no real obvious issue with going to a quiet crag at the moment because nobody else is going, if we're all allowed to drive (say) an hour to crag then this weekend would be chaos at lots of crags I would think.

[abarro81]

Which is exactly why the BMC should be consulting on, and working out, what etiquette we'll need to make it work safely.

[Ru]

Ru, can you explain the difference between climbing and cycling? The only difference I can see is that cycling happens to be mentioned as an example of an exercise. Other lawyers have mentioned climbing as a random form of exercise without noting any difference.

Perception rather than logic.

Possibly to some extent but climbing takes place on a limited number of venues so in some ways is more similar to say tennis or children's playgrounds when it comes to social distancing.

Sure, and that's part of the reason that the blanket climbing advice is "don't," but it's not something that's necessarily intrinsic to the activity. As an interesting contrast, my local pub carpark has become a popular place to park for walkers driving out into the countryside. There was a group of about 10 stood around chatting at the top of our road this afternoon. Clearly, that's inappropriate too.

[IanP]

Which is exactly why the BMC should be consulting on, and working out, what etiquette we'll need to make it work safely.

Completely agree with that, the BMC and to an extent discussion like this - we need to move away from whether it is or isn't worse than cycling, and edge cases about people who can walk to obscure crags for a bit of bouldering and start to consider what climbing might need to look like as (hopefully) some restrictions start to lift in the next few weeks.

[T_B]

Mountain bikers are having a field day on Peak District footpaths right now. The advice not to walk is patently ridiculous.

Driving more than, say 15 miles, to access the outdoors and open spaces is another matter. If there was a clear time limit on driving distance everything would be hunky dory. Maybe the BMC could take a position on that, as it would be sensible.

Many of the outdoor honeypots are full of day trippers, not BMC members. Just folk turning up, milling around and walking on popular footpaths around Edale, Snowdon etc. They can stay at home as far as I’m concerned whilst the BMC should represent the interests of climbers, hill walkers etc.

[spidermonkey09]

Many of the outdoor honeypots are full of day trippers, not BMC members. Just folk turning up, milling around and walking on popular footpaths around Edale, Snowdon etc. They can stay at home as far as I’m concerned whilst the BMC should represent the interests of climbers, hill walkers etc.

 

That attitude (fuck the general public, we want to go climbing) will do us absolutely no favours.

the BMC are unlikely to propose everyone else staying at home while we get to do what we want...