Bike rides

[whenskiesaregrey]

So, if someone goes on a 30, 40, 50+ bike ride, what explicit reasons can I give for why they can't do it?

Just for clarity, I don't think it should happen. But when challenged, people say there is no contact, routes are quiet etc. Just wondering how to respond to this.

I would say it depends who’s this and how long it will take him/her.
I wouldn’t do anything longer than an hour (even walking) because I might need toilet so potential contact.
I strongly suspect that some people will do this mainly to avoid looking after their DC.
My DH wouldn’t do it in case something happens - punches tyre, hits a deer crossing the road, falls down, etc (depends on the area) and what if someone else decides to race a car on that road assuming no one else will be using it...

Yes greenlynx, those are all valid concerns which individuals will use in their decision making but irrelevant if the question is "what are the rules?"

I don't want to specify distances or times as I don't want to make it identifiable. Hence why I've tried to keep it quite broad. But both the distance and time are greater than I've mentioned. I thought that it was going against the advice, but it seems I've misinterpreted it.

The guidelines on gov.uk say 'you must minimise the time spent out of your home' in the section about exercise. I would certainly feel a 3 hour long bike ride wouldn't be following those guidelines.

@foamrolling that was my interpretation also, but it appears that if you're on a bike, there is no limit to distance or time. Maybe that lack of clarity is what I'm finding difficult.

Why do you need to bother yourself with interpretations unless you yourself would like to cycle 50km and want clarification? For a fit, regular cyclist, a 50 km ride could take them just a couple of hours, it’s not a huge distance. I’m a long distance runner, a 5km run wouldn’t touch the sides for me - but I’m sticking to around 20km at a time, which I can do in 90 minutes and which seems appropriate.

It's on gov.uk in the coronavirus advice.

Yes Comtesse maybe I need to look at differentiating between what I can and cannot control for my own mental well-being.

But when people post their Strava on Facebook, I find it hard to ignore.

It is subjective of course. What is 'minimising' to an iron-man training super fit person would look excessive to someone who is moderately fit. I think to a certain extent you have to let people make their own decisions where something isn't a hard and fast rule.

It is subjective but around one suspects what these things (particularly in law) make sense to a reasonable person
That length of time and journey is to me not what the guidelines were designed to allow and therefore are not within the spirit of what the guidelines were designed to achieve

No one needs to cycle that long or far per day ergo unreasonable

I think a solo cyclist is fine

However I have seen loads of groups (ie 2+) of teen boys and their mates in my area on bikes, not actually cycling but just gathering outside and chatting. These are the people that should really stay at home as they’re essentially just socialising.

So I could go on a long walk through the countryside? I thought the guidance was no?

I've got a network of trails behind my house, why wouldn't I use them ? I can use one to walk to town 2.5 miles away, or do a 10-miler or mountain bike for 30+ miles on it. How's that different from going for a walk in the pavement? I don't usually go till teatime, though, as my kids are teenagers now and can heat up their own dinner. That way I see fewer people (usually the regulars).

I don't have to drive to get to that network of trails at all.

@thearch so, why have places like Delemere and Snowden discouraged people from walking in those areas if walking is fine? I too have a woods nearby where I live (at the end of my road). I avoid it generally, because there's always people there.

@Makeitgoaway
The question wasn’t about he rules the question was what explicit reasons can be given for why they can’t do it, so I just gave examples of reasons that can be given.

How many threads on this subject tonight?

It’s allowed. If I do a 30 mile bike ride from my house I have exercised locally.

If I drive 10 miles to the nearby forest with a nice bike track and cycle 2 miles that’s not allowed as it’s not local. And runs the risk of lots of people turning up at the same place.

Cycling doesn’t come under the “unnecessary travel” umbrella Because it’s under the “exercise” umbrella. Otherwise you could say a walk round the block is unnecessary.

I think in general you should mind your business. A 30 mile bike ride is not far for a regular cyclist. I wouldn't say it's a great time to start training for sportives if you haven't got experience / a clue, but most cyclists I know (myself included) are riding well within their normal training or below.

I say this BTW as someone who has swapped a fair bit of road training out for turbo training in the back garden due to my own personal comfort: not with the distances, but just feeling more comfortable when I know I can comfortably get back home on foot if I absolutely have to.

They are allowed. A 30 mile bike ride is only a couple of hours anyway.

You can walk up Snowden if you live in Llanberis or one of the other nearby villages. They don’t want hordes of people driving there and walking. As social distancing would not be achieved.

People need to use common sense. If a lane /path in one direction is heaving full of people I’m not going to go there. But if it’s empty I will happily cycle 20 miles along it.

why have places like Delemere and Snowden discouraged people from walking in those areas if walking is fine

They don't want the millions of people who live within a couple of hours of those places all congregating in the same place, but if the people who live locally go out walking that's fine as there aren't very many of them, but they should be careful and stick to safer paths that they know, to reduce the risk of needing mountain rescue. But nothing to stop people going out for a 2/3 hour walk or run.

In areas of higher population density, there has been issues with too many people to be able to maintain distance, eg city parks or Brighton beach, where there are a lot of people living within walking distance of a popular place.

Re the cycling, if you live in a flat area and are a regular cyclist, 30/40 miles isn't really exercise, which is why someone might want to go further afield, but the point about waiting for an ambulance if there's an accident is a good one. But laps of a shorter route to stay closer to home might be a good compromise and more in fitting with the exercise definition rather than a leisure run.

I think it’s ridiculous. So basically we can’t drive to our woods 5/10 minutes away but could cycle. Hoards of people have bikes near us. I can walk miles, why is that not ok but miles on a bike is? Cycling can be dangerous and also can spread germs from one area to the next the same as any other transport.

We’ve had people pushed into pavements and cyclists going very near pavement users, ditto joggers.I frankly don’t want anybody’s sweat flicked onto or near me at the moment.You are supposed to minimise time outside for exercise, stay local and not travel unnecessarily. That includes bikes. We are a cycling family but have parked the bikes for now.