contradictory information yet again about dog walking!

9

{97702}

...
Joined
9 July 2012
Messages
14,849
Visit site
Apparently these are being handed out to dog walkers in ‘popular’ dog walking areas.....

990CF96B-C39B-4131-AC9D-880825F87821.jpeg
That isn’t what the government guidelines actually say, so it’s a shame whoever wrote them can’t write plain English....
 
Yes

The actual guidance on the gov.uk website says....

180D050B-AE64-4926-8E51-78028D6DB52D.png

can someone tell me where that says you cannot travel to perform your exercise??!! Are we meant to be psychic?
 
It is not contradictory to the gov.uk website, quite clearly says you must stay at home apart from essential travel. It is contradictory to Michael Gove’s statement that it’s ok to drive somewhere to exercise. I think the police are right.

https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus
 
I’ve quoted the government website above - it doesn’t say not to travel....

Clearly I expect a higher level of written English than most of the UK from our government ?
 
I agree with the police. I live in a rural area with lots of footpaths. It’s like a motorway- endless walkers and runners, gateways blocked, lanes full of cars. I feel like driving to the empty town centres for a bit of space.

And no it doesn’t say not to travel, but it says don’t make any non essential journeys - you can walk your dog where you live, going elsewhere to walk them is not essential..
 
benz said:
Sorry Levrier, it quite clearly says not to travel. On the announcements section near the top (by the luminous green lines) it says ‘You must stay at home apart from essential travel or you may be fined’
Click to expand...

yes and when you click on that click for more information it takes you to what I posted....
 
Honey08 said:
I agree with the police. I live in a rural area with lots of footpaths. It’s like a motorway- endless walkers and runners, gateways blocked, lanes full of cars. I feel like driving to the empty town centres for a bit of space.

And no it doesn’t say not to travel, but it says don’t make any non essential journeys - you can walk your dog where you live, going elsewhere to walk them is not essential..
Click to expand...

I live in a rural area too ironically enough, I just happen to live in a large village/small town filled with people who have zero concept of social distancing.

As I said yesterday, I cannot believe that it is a better option for me to walk my dogs in the local crowded arboretum with a load of other folk who have no idea about keeping their distance, when I can go alone to my local woods and walk my dogs without encountering another soul or touching anything
 
Levrier said:
I live in a rural area too ironically enough, I just happen to live in a large village/small town filled with people who have zero concept of social distancing.

As I said yesterday, I cannot believe that it is a better option for me to walk my dogs in the local crowded arboretum with a load of other folk who have no idea about keeping their distance, when I can go alone to my local woods and walk my dogs without encountering another soul or touching anything
Click to expand...

I completely understand what you're saying, and don't think how you exercise your dogs in contrary to the spirit of the gvt guidance at all. However, the logical end point of your argument means that people can drive in their droves to popular walking spots to 'exercise' and walk their dogs, which exactly the behaviour that the gvt is trying to stop right now.
 
Hmmm - shame it is having no effect whatsoever ? I do try not to be this pedantic usually but I bloody hate poorly articulated instructions like this, and whilst I understand that the government want to simplify everything for people they really aren’t doing us any favours with over-simplification and contradictory advice.

I’ll just sit and mutter to myself in future.... ???
 
Honestly I see it very clearly and I’m struggling to see where the ambiguity is (on the website I mean, not with mixed messages coming from different MPs on that I would absolutely agree!)

-the title of the announcement states it in no uncertain terms
-the accompanying document mentions travel only in relation to going to work
-the final paragraph states you must minimise your time spent outside the home

while I would agree that the document does not explicitly state I cannot drive to a popular dog walking spot, my common sense (and of course the title of the announcement) tells me otherwise. It also doesn’t state I can’t drive to 3 towns over to go to my fave supermarket but it’s quite clear that i shouldn’t do that.

I understand your POV and it will be hard for you to walk the dogs, it’s going to be hard on all of us, but unfortunately for these next few weeks (hopefully just weeks!) we need to stay at home. That is the clear overriding message. The more people flount it the more restrictions will come into place. Just stay at home, if you need to leave your home for any essential reason you are outside for the shortest amount of time possible. As inconvenient as that is, we can all save lives by doing it so why wouldn’t you?
 
The guidance could be really clear and easy to understand, as is the French guidance, which states that your going out for either your own exercise or for taking out a pet is limited to a radius of 1km of your home for a duration of one hour.

Déplacements brefs, dans la limite d'une heure quotidienne et dans un rayon maximal d'un kilomètre autour du domicile, liés soit à l'activité physique individuelle des personnes... soit aux besoins des animaux de compagnie.
Click to expand...

Simples, eek.

I sometimes think that the British authorities (be they central or local government) try so hard to "dumb down" the text that they end up making the text useless.
 
Keith_Beef said:
The guidance could be really clear and easy to understand, as is the French guidance, which states that your going out for either your own exercise or for taking out a pet is limited to a radius of 1km of your home for a duration of one hour.



Simples, eek.

I sometimes think that the British authorities (be they central or local government) try so hard to "dumb down" the text that they end up making the text useless.
Click to expand...

Thank you KB - my point exactly
 
benz said:
Honestly I see it very clearly and I’m struggling to see where the ambiguity is (on the website I mean, not with mixed messages coming from different MPs on that I would absolutely agree!)

-the title of the announcement states it in no uncertain terms
-the accompanying document mentions travel only in relation to going to work
-the final paragraph states you must minimise your time spent outside the home

while I would agree that the document does not explicitly state I cannot drive to a popular dog walking spot, my common sense (and of course the title of the announcement) tells me otherwise. It also doesn’t state I can’t drive to 3 towns over to go to my fave supermarket but it’s quite clear that i shouldn’t do that.

I understand your POV and it will be hard for you to walk the dogs, it’s going to be hard on all of us, but unfortunately for these next few weeks (hopefully just weeks!) we need to stay at home. That is the clear overriding message. The more people flount it the more restrictions will come into place. Just stay at home, if you need to leave your home for any essential reason you are outside for the shortest amount of time possible. As inconvenient as that is, we can all save lives by doing it so why wouldn’t you?
Click to expand...

Before you lecture me on social responsibility (which I have a rather good awareness of given the job I do) could I suggest you actually read my posts, where I clearly explain that the actions I would prefer to take involve far LESS risk to the general public than the government guidelines? If they did not, of course I wouldn’t be wanting to do them - I’m not stupid
 
I live in a city in NZ. Luckily I do have some outdoor space near my house. However I spend my weekends hiking for 6-8 hours a day, sometimes overnight. I thought I would be able to drive 30-60 minutes to the hills where it is quieter. It made sense to me. However our PM has advised to stay local, and to think about how driving around for non essential activities will mean more frequent fuel stops & more risk of breaking down or accidents. Putting petrol services and breakdown recovery staff/police/ambulances etc at more risk unnecessarily. Guidance still seems a little unclear. But I will be sticking to the hills behind my house, and dogs on leads. It's not for ever (hopefully).
 
The problem with driving somewhere to a less crowded place is that, yes, you possibly increase your social isolation (depending on how many other people have had the same idea) but you increase your risk of an RTA, breakdown etc all of which would then increase pressure on the NHS. The advise is stay home and be outside for as little time as possible. Driving somewhere increases your time outside and is therefore against the spirit, if not the exact wording, of the information. And if you want clarity like the French, don't worry, that's where we're headed because people continue to take the piss.
 
I think it is perfectly clear that 'you should be minimising time spent outside of the home' is not compatible with driving anywhere to walk your dog or take any other form of exercise.

That is not to say that I think that is sensible advice. It would, for example. Be a lot more sensible for people to drive five miles to my quiet bit of countryside and walk here than in the crowded parks in town.

But unfortunately, because of the idiots, we have to have a one rule fits all approach. There are large parts of the country locked down simply because the major towns need to be, for example.

.
 
Last edited:
I actually agree with the police as well people shouldn't be driving to areas to walk, I live opposite a very well known dog walking area during the week I see mainly paid dog walkers, some days when I ride or walk over there I don't see a soul, this week it's heaving with walkers and cyclists and I can see all there parked cars along the road, they shouldn't be driving here.
 
Its hard. I've been out volunteering after working and taking dogs with me so they also have change of scenery and on the way home we can stop at the park and have our one walk. I live in Greenwich (zone 3)
The nearest park to me is a 5 min walk but goes past shops that are still open and takes me 9 mins (timed!) to walk around. Its flat and devoid of trees apart from one small row of bushes.
The park i've stopped off at is a 5 min drive from my house, i'm less likely to pass anyone on the way, its easier to maintain social distancing as larger, has hills, trees and squirrels so I can walk around in one hour and all three of us have decent exercise. Now i feel I shouldnt be taking the dogs with me and limiting myself to that walkable park, but that also means i'm going out more as i'll be walking them, more risk of passing people on the way etc,and then after work going out and doing my errands, plus still popping up to the yard to see to my part-loan on my days.

Normally we drive 40 mins at weekends to Kent to do a good 7 or 9 mile adventure. I obviously wont do that but now I feel guilty about taking dogs out with me!
 
vallin said:
The problem with driving somewhere to a less crowded place is that, yes, you possibly increase your social isolation (depending on how many other people have had the same idea) but you increase your risk of an RTA, breakdown etc all of which would then increase pressure on the NHS. The advise is stay home and be outside for as little time as possible. Driving somewhere increases your time outside and is therefore against the spirit, if not the exact wording, of the information. And if you want clarity like the French, don't worry, that's where we're headed because people continue to take the piss.
Click to expand...

About time really, if the government had been clear from the start we wouldn’t have had half the issues we have experienced over the past couple of weeks ?
 
Levrier said:
About time really, if the government had been clear from the start we wouldn’t have had half the issues we have experienced over the past couple of weeks ?
Click to expand...

Again that's very easy to say. The government is working off information from the scientific community. Originally it was thought that, given the relatively low transmission rate, herd immunity could be reached without overwhelming the NHS, assuming the public obeyed social distancing to reduce the rate further. People didn't so that option is no longer viable. Hence the change in government policy. Now we have to isolate for an infinite amount of time until either an effective vaccine is produce, an effective treatment is produced, or herd immunity is reached. I cannot stand BoJo but there's no point blaming him or the government, they can only with off the information available. (And you can say look to Italy but given the difference in social structure and demographic there is only so much that can be extrapolated)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top