Jump to content

Can we cruise again?


Featured Posts

2 hours ago, Higgs said:

 

I'd have to say, not all ministers have the function of delivering the information. Although, they can always express an opinion

 

 

 

How are we, the general public, supposed to discern the difference?

 

36 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Point of order m'lud... isn't it 'lurgy'?

 

It's the Dreaded Lurgy, if memory serves!

 

 

31 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

that would be a rather anti-social thing to do unless you were sure that the towpath in question was uncrowded.

 

Strange, isn't it, that the most socially responsible thing anyone can do is to be deliberately anti-social!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

For a start, your first duty is to avoid getting the virus: even if you're sure you'll be just fine, that's by the far the most effective way to avoid giving it to others, which is highest priority of all. To do that you need to stay at home as much as possible. Staying at home all the time is difficult, so you can justify going out sometimes, but only if you have to. Don't go to the shops more than you need to eat, and don't go out to exercise more than you need to stay healthy and sane. When you do go out, avoid other people as much as possible, and try and have a plan in advance to do this; It's good to go an exercise where you can be reasonably sure there won't be other people around, if you get there and find that against expectation it's crowded, go somewhere else, and avoid planning to go anywhere you know will be crowded. In short , though you _can_ "drive to the boat every day, have a picnic , walk/cycle the towpath" that would be a rather anti-social thing to do unless you were sure that the towpath in question was uncrowded.

This is my whole point. If my first duty is to avoid getting the virus should I be staying in a house with someone who, from 1st June, will be in daily contact with a school full of primary school children? You've quoted my reply to someones post without considering all the circumstances.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Traveller said:


Not seen anything from Middle Level Commissioners.

No boats through recently. We had two cabin cruisers through in March, and a couple of local people getting exercise in their canoes a bit more recently, and that's been it. Mind you, we don't get many anyway, especially when Fox's hire fleet isn't operating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MoominPapa said:

For a start, your first duty is to avoid getting the virus: even if you're sure you'll be just fine, that's by the far the most effective way to avoid giving it to others, which is highest priority of all. To do that you need to stay at home as much as possible. Staying at home all the time is difficult, so you can justify going out sometimes, but only if you have to. Don't go to the shops more than you need to eat, and don't go out to exercise more than you need to stay healthy and sane. When you do go out, avoid other people as much as possible, and try and have a plan in advance to do this; It's good to go an exercise where you can be reasonably sure there won't be other people around, if you get there and find that against expectation it's crowded, go somewhere else, and avoid planning to go anywhere you know will be crowded. In short , though you _can_ "drive to the boat every day, have a picnic , walk/cycle the towpath" that would be a rather anti-social thing to do unless you were sure that the towpath in question was uncrowded.

 

 

MP.

 

Precisely. Common sense. Dont go out just because you can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What really annoys me is that if you meet your parents (more than one) or visit your boat and fall asleep (overnight) then you've broken the law  and could be prosecuted. But, the 2m distance and facecovering on public transport is only guidance. Cannon fodder in all this

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mrsmelly said:

Correct stay at home were possible. I dont have to work so I would be a pratt if I suddenly, and the other many people like myself suddenly started going out willy nilly. When the gov open the pubs and the rest of whatever at the end of their staged reopening fully then and only then do they want us all to go out. They dont want workers to use public transport but accept that many have to, staying locked down will do more damage than the virus ever could so a staged reopening is what will happen and the deaths will yo yo.

People don't have to play golf or tennis, but the recent changes mean that they are quite at liberty to do so.

 

Since you and others seem so intent upon 'commonsense' how about some commonsense Government decisions rather than being led by the wittering classes of the Daily Wail and Sun. When the lockdown is lifted there will be an increase in infections and deaths, I think pretty much everyone is accepting of that. When Spain started to come out of lockdown, their daily infection rate was circa 500-700 (under 1000) and now after about 10 days they are back up to 3000+ so, unless you still believe in the English exceptionalism, we can pretty much expect the same, except we are currently starting from a far higher figure, so after 10 days or so, instead of going up to where the Spanish are at 3000 (still less that where we are now) we could easily rise to 16,000 - 17,000 infections a day if we get the same percentage rise. Do I trust the 'commonsense' Government to then say,"Oh we need to re-impose a lock-down", frankly, no I don't as it would be acknowledgement of lifting the lockdown too soon so we will rattle on with increasing infection/death rates until they have no choice and we will be back to where we started from.

 

Two more weeks lockdown and then monitor what is happening elsewhere and follow the sensible lead would be the commonsense approach, but as you say we don't do commonsense.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

When I first encounter locks, I shall be washing my hands after each and every lock.  Wearing gloves is pointless IMO.  It just means you may have virus on your gloves instead of your hands.  If you then touch your face, the outcome is the same.  Your hands are easier to wash too.  Disposable gloves may have some value IF you discard them after every lock but that's probably more bother than washing your hands.

What's the value in gloves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

 

Two more weeks lockdown and then monitor what is happening elsewhere and follow the sensible lead would be the commonsense approach, but as you say we don't do commonsense

 

There may well be a spike in  about two weeks because of the bank holiday just gone so don't expect lockdown to be lifted in two weeks. ;)

 

 

10 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

What's the value in gloves?

 

Stops the virus being picked up from hard surfaces but you would need to ditch them as after every lock and disinfect your windlass.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, pete.i said:

 

. I did vote for bojo purely because he said he would take us out of the thievingly corrupt EU. He hasn't done that yet although, admittedly, he has had some distractions.

 

I think you will find we have left the E.U. Granted we are in a transition until the end of the year, but we then finish that period. Negotiations are continuing to finalise a trade agreement.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, trane said:

This is my whole point. If my first duty is to avoid getting the virus should I be staying in a house with someone who, from 1st June, will be in daily contact with a school full of primary school children? You've quoted my reply to someones post without considering all the circumstances.

 

I scrolled back to find your original posting. Given your circumstances, I can't see any reason why you shouldn't become a liveboard boater and work under the rules for such. I certainly see the point of banning nights away from home, but what you are proposing, I think, is that you'd move onto the boat _and_stay_there_, not returning to your current abode for the foreseeable future. That seems sensible to me.

 

MP.

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Loddon said:

 

There may well be a spike in  about two weeks because of the bank holiday just gone so don't expect lockdown to be lifted in two weeks. ;)

 

 

 

Stops the virus being picked up from hard surfaces but you would need to ditch them as after every lock and disinfect your windlass.

 

Unless you are an expert in taking them off you would still need to wash your hands anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Struggling to believe what I saw at the shop a short while ago. I was waiting at a distance to get to what I wanted and lots of people were just going in right next to each other to get things. Then one guy recognises another bloke and they promptly go right up to each other and shake hands. How are you doing says one, the other replied I’m good, I’m just round here at the moment helping out as a doctor with this Coronavirus thing. Speechless!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

I think you will find we have left the E.U. Granted we are in a transition until the end of the year, but we then finish that period. Negotiations are continuing to finalise a trade agreement.

We will not have left the EU until we have WTO or a real free trade deal with the EU... the latter won't happen because unlike all the other countries the EU has made a free trade deal with without strings we are a 'special case'.   For 'special case' read 'canary in the coal mine'.  Oh... I did a politics thing... my bad. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

People don't have to play golf or tennis, but the recent changes mean that they are quite at liberty to do so.

 

Since you and others seem so intent upon 'commonsense' how about some commonsense Government decisions rather than being led by the wittering classes of the Daily Wail and Sun. When the lockdown is lifted there will be an increase in infections and deaths, I think pretty much everyone is accepting of that. When Spain started to come out of lockdown, their daily infection rate was circa 500-700 (under 1000) and now after about 10 days they are back up to 3000+ so, unless you still believe in the English exceptionalism, we can pretty much expect the same, except we are currently starting from a far higher figure, so after 10 days or so, instead of going up to where the Spanish are at 3000 (still less that where we are now) we could easily rise to 16,000 - 17,000 infections a day if we get the same percentage rise. Do I trust the 'commonsense' Government to then say,"Oh we need to re-impose a lock-down", frankly, no I don't as it would be acknowledgement of lifting the lockdown too soon so we will rattle on with increasing infection/death rates until they have no choice and we will be back to where we started from.

 

Two more weeks lockdown and then monitor what is happening elsewhere and follow the sensible lead would be the commonsense approach, but as you say we don't do commonsense.

We shouldn't forget that the main purpose of the lockdown, as 'sold' to the public was to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed. It wasn't introduced to stop all deaths from the virus. To do so would be impossible. To get close to 'no deaths' would require limitations on freedoms that would be unacceptable in our culture. If by chance these limitations were accepted, and widely adhered to by the vast majority of the population, the economy would be left in a state as unpalatable to the British people as would have been the limitations to 'achieve' this.

 

So I'm afraid the path is still to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed until such a time as some kind of 'herd immunity' is established and/ or a successful vaccine is developed.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

To get close to 'no deaths' would require limitations on freedoms that would be unacceptable in our culture. If by chance these limitations were accepted, and widely adhered to by the vast majority of the population, the economy would be left in a state as unpalatable to the British people as would have been the limitations to 'achieve' this.

Maybe we could have compromised a bit with our precious culture and not ended up with more deaths (so far) than any comparable country apart from the USA? Or maybe we could just have elected a competent government rather than the current shower of charlatans.

 

If, for instance, they had locked down at the stage New Zealand did, we'd have essentially no new cases now, and could open up the economy with a good chance of using test, trace and track to keep the lid on things until a vaccine is available. In fact we're opening up "for the economy" when we still have thousands of new cases per day, and therefore no chance of controlling the situation apart from with suppression; even if we they could organise the testing/tracing effort, which looks, frankly, unlikely.

 

It's pretty clear to me that there's nothing to stop a second wave in a few weeks, who knows what will happen then.

 

 

MP.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

It's pretty clear to me that there's nothing to stop a second wave in a few weeks, who knows what will happen then.

You could well be right. Let's hope that the government's statistics are accurate and the associated changes to legislation/ guidelines don't lead to the NHS being overwhelmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

Maybe we could have compromised a bit with our precious culture and not ended up with more deaths (so far) than any comparable country apart from the USA? Or maybe we could just have elected a competent government rather than the current shower of charlatans.

 

If, for instance, they had locked down at the stage New Zealand did, we'd have essentially no new cases now, and could open up the economy with a good chance of using test, trace and track to keep the lid on things until a vaccine is available. In fact we're opening up "for the economy" when we still have thousands of new cases per day, and therefore no chance of controlling the situation apart from with suppression; even if we they could organise the testing/tracing effort, which looks, frankly, unlikely.

 

It's pretty clear to me that there's nothing to stop a second wave in a few weeks, who knows what will happen then.

 

 

MP.

 

 

 

Which makes you think any extended cruising (after navigation reopens), without a very good plan, could be problematic. Where might you be if things are suddenly locked down again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Loddon said:

 

There may well be a spike in  about two weeks because of the bank holiday just gone so don't expect lockdown to be lifted in two weeks. ;)

 

 

 

Stops the virus being picked up from hard surfaces but you would need to ditch them as after every lock and disinfect your windlass.

 

just buy a dozen pairs of washable gloves and re-cycle.

Imagine your skin to be a sticky substrate covered in dods of virus. Until you can do that you will not understand how to stop the spread. 

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.