Walking "close to home" - what does this mean?

And it says "swimming", which unless you live on a canal boat means you need to walk or drive to get to the water.

There are always going to be circumstances which don't fit exactly, because boris addressed us collectively, not individually, by name.

That’s fair comment, MissAdventure, except I guess for quite a few people, that would mean walking through busy streets / town centres, etc? (Maybe not very safe)

If everyone just walked out of their door to as far as they could manage in order to get back in an hour or so, none of this checking and cross referencing would be needed.

25Avalon

I have just looked at the regulations on the Government website. It explains that “local means stay in the village, town or part of the city where you live”. “You should not travel outside your local area.”

That seems fairly plain to me. So no driving out to NT Gardens, Beaches, driving to open moorland, etc.

And to add to that local means within the village, town or city area boundary, not hopping over the line as it suits, unless there are special circumstances.

Oops lots of typos .Sorry !

Suzzanah.I will be driving to our nearest farm shop 3 miles away on Monday to top up our food as it's bother 10 days until our next supermarket delivery slot.And using the same trip to shop for our Auntbin her 90s living alone.That's necessary.I shan't however be driving the 6 miles to the resevoir I was going at least once a week to walk the dogs and meet my friend for a socially distanced walk as I had been doing before Xmas.We never bought a coffee on the way by the way !.Just exercised ourselves and the dogs. Ow it will be from home alone.

MamaCaz

The problem as far as i can see lies in the definition - or rather in the absence of a written definition - of the words 'local area'.

I have no idea at all what would mean to me. Our parish boundaries? The area covered by South Northants Council? Something else? Not that I know where any of those boundaries begin and end.

It's neither clear not specific about what this means, and makes the fine handed out seem very unfair to me.

I bet it wouldn't stand up in court!

Exactly!??

If we stayed in our village we wouldn't eat. We could get food delivered, but that's another slot taken away from people who can't/shouldn't go out. Our neighbours are already complaining they are having difficulty getting a slot some weeks.

Our nearest shop is about three miles away in the next village. In the opposite direction about five miles. Those are small shops - we do a major shop once a month about eight miles away by car, then walk to the smaller shops once a week.

I have just looked at the regulations on the Government website. It explains that “local means stay in the village, town or part of the city where you live”. “You should not travel outside your local area.”

That seems fairly plain to me. So no driving out to NT Gardens, Beaches, driving to open moorland, etc.

We live about 25 miles from the coast and whilst a normal weekend walk would be a drive to walk along the sea front (in an area that has been counted as officially suppressing the virus) we accepted that this weekend that will not be possible. So coats and shoes on and a circular (boring) walk around our village where we encountered dog walkers, cyclists, joggers and shoppers. But we kept to the rules and were out for one hour in our local area.

A sensible person, if on arrival at place that they expected to be quiet discovers that it is in fact busy, will stay in their car and go elsewhere.I seem to recall some Gransnetter (s) saying that they have done that very thing. Both well-intentioned and sensible, IMO.

All those people on the crowded sea front won’t be local. They’ll have made it crowded by travelling there. But you can’t complain about that if you’re travelling to somewhere else, can you?

I guess because lots and lots of people have taken the decision to drive somewhere “uncrowded”.

If one person can drive to the moors then so can 100 or 65 million. None of us can say “but it’s only me”.

'Keep your distance' is one of the rules.
Ellianne intends to do that while crowds of people on the seafront may not.

Surely that should be the deciding factor.

What's the point of saying "Yes, they are all close to their homes so that's okay." while harassing people who drive to somewhere uncrowded?

That’s the problem. For every person who, like Ellianne, can make a sensible decision, there are at least a dozen who cannot and who will make poor decisions, not purposely but thinking what they are doing is ok or necessary.

Either we accept that everyone can make their own decisions, even though many of those decisions will be bad.
Or we say that because many individual decisions will be bad we have to remove the right of decision, even from those who can make good ones.

There’s no way of singling people out. You make good decisions so you can do what you like. You make poor decisions so you must obey.

If anyone makes their own decision as to what is sensible they have to accept that everyone can do that.

.Ellianne that seems very sensible and safe to me. Much better than taking your car in for essential service and MOT which is permitted, and find Covid safety in the garage is not as good as it could be and you feel at risk.

If we can avoid meeting anyone at all and take precautions then ideally we should be able to do so knowing we are behaving in a responsible manner. However, there have to be rules and a line has to be drawn somewhere because so many are not being sensible.

You only have to read this thread and others on the same subject to see that everyone is just doing what suits them. Any attempted enforcement of “keeping safe’ is met with howls of protest and criticism of those who are trying to keep the virus under control. Often at considerable risk to themselves.

I find it really hard to get my head around the way people can hold two opposing ideas.

“Somebody should get this virus under control. Things should be stricter.”

“I should be able to do to decide what is best for me to do. My actions won’t affect the spread”

Like you NotSpaghetti I have read the rules several times, but am still not completely clear about their meaning.

Today is Saturday and I have two large dogs to exercise. If I take my usual daily walk through the park I will arrive at the seafront where today I will have to battle past walkers, joggers, children on bikes, more dogs, wheelchairs etc. It is like a free for all along the front at the weekend and impossible to socially distance.
Instead I am going to get in my car and drive 3 miles to the open moor, walk for two hours, passing perhaps two other dog walkers, then drink my flask of coffee in my car.
Risk assessment completed, no looking for loopholes, just using common sense.

Hetty 58, yes I would! I'd do exactly that to avoid a fine. THAT was the purpose of the question.

So, for example, have a lake near me - about a mile away.
Is that "local"? It's in a different county.

lemsip I've been there (obviously) and even quoted from it on this thread

?

I purposely referred to the Air Raid Warden in Dad's Army growstuff because he was a caricature.

Alegrias1

The image of the Air Raid Warden in Dad's Army keeps popping into my head.

Don't question anything, don't ask any questions just do what you're told. Lots of exclamation marks!! Its all those other people's fault, if it wasn't for them we'd be much better off. Poster elsewhere saying we should be more like China.

Just listen to yourselves.

One of my grandmothers was an Air Raid Warden. She used to become apoplectic about some of the pathetic excuses people came up with for breaking the rules.

NotSpaghetti My personal interpretation (for all that it matters) is that people should, where possible, go for walks round their town, village or park (if there is one). Most small towns and villages have pleasant walks which can be reached without driving. It's a bigger problem in built up areas and allowance has been made for people who would need to drive a few miles to reach an open space. It's difficult to put a precise distance on that.

The ideal situation would be for everybody to stay shut up in their homes for a few weeks, but the government has sensibly recognised that isn't reasonable and allowing people out to exercise is a concession. If people abuse that, we're going to end up with harsher restrictions. Policing that for 66 million people is hard and relies on people caring about the common good. Unfortunately, if too many people take the micky and infection rates don't go down, we're all going to end up paying the price.

As I said, it doesn't really matter what I think. It wouldn't actually bother me personally if I had China-style lockdown measures imposed, but I don't have children or dogs.

The image of the Air Raid Warden in Dad's Army keeps popping into my head.

Don't question anything, don't ask any questions just do what you're told. Lots of exclamation marks!! Its all those other people's fault, if it wasn't for them we'd be much better off. Poster elsewhere saying we should be more like China.

Just listen to yourselves.