View topic - Tripping in the age of COVID

Zev. I just put it together. I think I know why you're asking.... I think you'll be fine. Worst case is to skip around that big metropolis in the early stage but things are actually not near as bad out here as in the east.
Lets hope it keeps getting better for everyone and it won't be an issue.

If you do go I want to hear all about it. I've thought of doing the same thing just not enough time... yet

mark

I strongly disagree with this. As a former voluntary SAR team member, the issue is that SAR members themselves should be staying home, and activating them unnecessarily means that they have to interact with one another, and could potentially spread the virus within their communities.

And while local hospitals may not yet be as busy as Toronto, the fact that there are currently 26 positive cases in Sudbury, with 1 death means that if people don't isolate and do things like travel, etc., the risks of exponential growth have already been proven elsewhere.

Of course the biggest risk of going canoeing at this time isn't to the individual making that choice, or to the SAR team, or the hospital, but is to the collective consciousness, because if it's alright for 1 person, then why isn't it ok for us all to go canoeing as usual and flood the backcountry? The concept of individual risk is moot when faced with a collective problem. Pandemics are societal issues by nature, the fact that I'm willing to accept a higher risk personally doesn't mean that I have the right to impose that risk on others.

After much debate - some internal, some with family, and some online - I have decided to stay home.

Although my strong personal opinion is that I could go to my cottage or on a solo canoe trip without any contribution to spreading the virus, I've come to accept that it is not about my personal opinion. We are in this together and there are clearly lots of opinions that are different than mine. As articulated in the previous post, it is about the collective consciousness.

The reasons I'm not gong are not about any logical arguments or deciding who's right. It's me caving to social pressure. While I don't like the sounds of that normally, that is what we are being asked to do now: put aside self interest and "stay at home unless absolutely necessary".

I don't buy many of the arguments, but ultimately it's hard to argue with the clear, simple message to stay home.

As my wife put it, if I don't go the chance of me contributing to the virus, either by moving it around or by influencing others, is zero; if I do go, the chance is somewhere above zero, and that's why we're being asked to stay home.

For me, seeing some of the bitterness of the debate in a few online communities was a also a factor - it made just want to stay out of it. So, although I hate it and could rationalize it for myself, I'll stay home and be certain that I've done no harm and won't be perceived as doing harm. After all, "stay home unless absolutely necessary" is pretty clear, and it does apply to everyone, cottagers and canoeists included.

Pat.

p.s. I won't actually "stay home" all the time. Getting outside for activity and fresh air is critical, and for me that will include local paddling, but not travel for overnight trips.

_________________
Learning to paddle is like learning a language:
It's easy to learn the basics, but will you be understood in a strong wind?

I realize that we all need to do our part but I'd like to examine what that means.
I could argue that any trip out of the house is potentially contributing to the spread of the virus so we perhaps we can classify activities as "necessary" trips and "unnecessary" trips. Not sure if this classification works in real life but it might be a starting point for some discussion.

So grocery store or pharmacy trips are "necessary" and therefore comprise a necessary risk and any other activities are "unnecessary" and therefore comprise an unnecessary risk. Accurate breakdown?

Is getting out of your house or apartment to exercise or to walk your dog "necessary"?
One could exercise at home. One could put the dog out in the backyard or play with the dog inside and make some allowance for an inside location for the dog to go to the bathroom.
I classify these as "necessary" activities because of their physical and mental health benefits, however, social distancing might become an issue especially if many other people are exercising or dog-walking in a relatively confined and crowded are. Also, it is possible that one could twist an ankle or have some other health issue while outside the house. So, what do others think? Are outdoor exercise and outdoor dog-walking necessary? Are they selfish?


I haven't been staying home all the time. I've been going cross country skiing at our local trails and have been practicing social distancing when there. I have seen other people and talked with other people on the trails but have been strict about maintaining distance. I could. potentially, infect others or others could infect me. I could be involved in a car accident on the way to or back from skiing. I could get injured while skiing and require assistance to get back to my car or I might need an ambulance ride to a potentially overburdened hospital. All of these things are possible so should I not go skiing because of the risks? Is going skiing selfish?


So, back to the original question, to trip or not to trip?
I don’t want to spread the disease but I do want to go paddling. I think that both are possible.
I think that local trips which involve (including shuttle) only the trippers or others who have been social-distancing together with the trippers on well-known waters, where paddlers can social distance from others who might be on those waters, seems OK.

I also think that longer trips which involve (including shuttle) only the trippers or others who have been social-distancing together with the trippers on less well-known but easy waters, where paddlers can social distance from others who might be on those water, seems OK. FWIW, over many years of paddling and tripping I have never had an accident going to or coming home from a paddling outing.

Just for the sake of discussion, I’m wondering if people, who have been self-isolating for 14 days or more and who are not from the same self-isolating group can trip together as long as when they are done the trip they all go immediately into a 14 day self-isolation without interacting with other people?
Again, just for the sake of discussion, I'm wondering if you have self-isolated for 14 or more days on a canoe trip, can you be exposed to other people on the way home as long as you go immediately into a 14-day self-isolation when you return to your home?

Ralph

Here's a quote from the Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario.

"I strongly recommend you and other members of your household stay home except for essential reasons, such as to:

Access health care services;
Shop for groceries;
Pick-up medication at the pharmacy;
Walk pets when required; and
Support vulnerable community members with meeting the above needs.
To the fullest extent possible, you should also limit the number of these essential trips. However, when you are out in public you must adhere to physical distancing by reducing your exposure to other people outside of your household by keeping two metres from other people. "

Clearly paddling is not on that list.

If you decide to trip with others - if the group is larger than 5 you will be subject to a fine in Ontario for congregating in a group.

I would also suggest that the more people continue to go out and about on non-essential trips, the more likely the government will implement a mandatory requirement with more stringent penalties. Italy, Spain, China, France, have much stronger lockdowns because people didn't adhere to the limiting of travel, or staying home.

I can't believe this discussion is still going on with people trying to justify the risk of going out. its not about if it is a low risk drive, easy paddle or what ever. The fact is anything that is over and above staying home, however small is still increasing the risk.

Do beware that in Ontario they have instituted phone lines and online places where local residents call in every day to report people breakig the rules , thousands of calls have been received so far

In Ontario anywhere north of the Barrie parallel residents are scouting and reporting unsafe activities
on a daily basis and it's very likley that the police are looking for someone to make an example of by slapping them with a very large fine and possibly jail time in order to send a message

Stay home , stay safe and Happy Easter

Satchmo. I agree that unnecessarily activating a SAR team is a bad idea. I've also worked SAR and with them so I understand what you mean. You must also see that a SAR op can easily be accomplished while maintaining social distancing - in fact its almost a requirement if you are going to find anyone (for ground search obviously)
Actually your list doesn't even include walking (unless you have a pet). Is it reasonable to say no running, biking, skate boarding etc too?

Others:
One thing to consider is that Covid is a very different thing in the provinces outside of Ontario and Quebec (I would have said BC a couple of weeks ago but they are doing even better than us now!). The rules, as you may understand them, are different province to province. There is a reason for this

Ralph brings up a great point about what is necessary and what is not. I've been labelled as an "essential" worker. In order to perform my job, I'm in close contact with at least 12 of my peers everyday. Through the course of the day our group will also be in close contact with dozens of sick people (some of whom could potentially have covid - eg. they have symptoms), We will also be near dozens of other members of the public (although usually not close) as well as in dozens of buildings. We also may bring sick people in and out of the hospital. After our shift we go home to our families and then the next day we come back and do it all over again.

What is more risky to the public? Me doing my job or somebody paddling somewhere that is removed from people?

I'm not unique either. There are the thousands of frontline workers that I speak of and unless they are symptomatic, they are not required to isolate (this is nationwide) - which means we all walk in the parks and go to the grocery stores with everyone else. Is it safe? Should I feel guilty for getting groceries? Should I not go home to my family and just stay at work? (serious questions... careful with your answer please. I'm a person)
It just seems hypocritical to me that I can do all these things with my daily potential exposure but others that are far less likely to cause anything are getting judged so harshly.
This is why I said earlier that I'm really struggling with this.... If you think its dumb than you don't need to say so.
This isn't black and white to me. If it is for you, you're lucky but you aren't in my shoes

I like how Yarnel put it and his advice is the best I've seen. I also have cancelled my paddling plans. Although if the opportunity presents itself I will paddle locally (if I'm to follow the Ontario rules I'll have to bring a pet?) - my put in is a closer drive than Costco. I could even portage over if I have to but I suppose I could turn an ankle and I'd have to call 911 (same for the jogger though...)

Lastly, the city I live in since the outset has 6 cases identified that are all travel related. No new cases in the last 10 days. No deaths. The community transmission rate here in Alberta is down to 5% (highest was 12%) well below the national average. We seem to be doing OK for now and it looks like our actions are working.
- Saskatchewan and Man. combined are even less than that BTW
I don't claim to know the numbers in Ontario but I also wouldn't consider paddling there (until they say so).

I want to preface this post by saying that I have been pretty much isolated for close to 4 weeks with very limited contact with others in that time period. Mostly because its pretty easy for me to do so, more than feeling it is a large personal risk.

Now, life is full of a variety of risks and it should be up to the individual to decide how they want to respond to each of those risks. The government should not be allowed to remove your freedoms and tell you how to personally manage your risks. I haven't seen the exact statistics but I have heard that vehicular deaths and injuries have decreased in the last few weeks due to significantly fewer people on the roads. Is that an argument to ban vehicle traffic? I'm pretty sure there are typically more vehicular deaths per year than have been killed by the virus so far. I'm going to assume that the majority of people would think that's absurd and would suggest that people who judge the risk of driving to be too great for themselves can avoid it of their own accord, not by banning everyone else from doing so. Much the same that anyone who deems the virus too great a risk to themselves should be able to take the precautions that they feel necessary to avoid it. Not by dictating what every "free" individual has to do or not do.

Now, I know a response to this would be something like "what about the healthcare, emergency response, etc, workers who have to respond to you when you have an accident?". Well thankfully those people also have the freedom to manage their risks. They have to determine if their paycheck and reputation outweighs any risks involved with responding to my accident. Ironically healthcare workers are some of the few people who have that choice right now. Unfortunately there are many people who don't have the opportunity to decide if going to work is worth the risk or not because mandatory shutdowns of businesses has taken that choice away from them.

Another angle on the issue...incubation time is typically about 5 days, but can last up to two weeks before symptoms begin. I’ve heard enough anecdotes now to know that if you begin to show symptoms while out on a solo trip, you’ll very quickly realize that you will soon be incapable of accomplishing even the simplest tasks, let alone paddle and portage your way out of the bush. A co-worker of mine knows a fellow that just got over it. Fifty-one years old and fit as can be - no health conditions and a non-smoker. He could barely make it to his en-suite bathroom, and was in and out of hallucinations for five days. By the time it was over he lost over 40 pounds. Something to think about.

_________________

www.mikemonaghan.ca

JVK, I think the point is that during an unprecedented global pandemic we are being asked to consider more than our individual risks. The impacts of the virus, especially a quick spike in cases, has serious society-wide impacts to health and economy, which is different than other risks like driving. If car accidents or anything else were suddenly resulting in world-wide loads of patients in the hallways, temporary hospitals in the streets, business closures, billions in gov support programs, international trade bickering, etc., yes, I'd expect government would ask us to adjust our rights to drive!

I had a very hard time deciding not to go to the cottage.

I would be perfectly correct to say "The decision is mine and I have the right to go! It's safe, I pay taxes, etc.!". It's all true, I do have that right, I am free to go, it is my decision to make. But I now recognize that there are good reasons that I'm being politely asked not to act on that at this moment. Sure, I'd be right, but so what? For now it's not about who has the right to do what.

We're being asked to play a team game. The more people play along, the quicker it will be to return to some activities/freedoms.

Good point CG, that is something I had not considered!

P.

_________________
Learning to paddle is like learning a language:
It's easy to learn the basics, but will you be understood in a strong wind?

I have been in isolation since March 13th. My wife has gone to the grocery store twice in that time, fully outfitted for the plague. I go walking every single day on a snow shoe trail I created this winter, about 5 K. No people. I was skidooing and ice fishing up till last week. No people. When the ice goes out, in about a month, I will walk 200 feet to the back of my property and go canoeing. No people. I will probably go on a few overnight trips too, with my wife. Again, no people.



I am considerably North of Barrie, and I can tell you this is not the case. Many people have not grasped the seriousness of this yet. And of course we don't want to see a bunch of canoeists arriving in town. But for those of us who live here, being on the water and in the bush is a daily activity, and one that can be done with no fear of meeting people and no risk beyond what is normal in our lives.

Hi Yarnell. My first post in this thread may disagree with this description a bit, but ultimately I shouldn't be trying to sway your decision too much one way or the other. The main message I am trying to convey is that the decision should be your own based on the facts and information that you have available to yourself. The government should stay out of it. If the virus was killing 80% of the population, I would still suggest that the government not enforce a mandatory lockdown, even though it would obvious that people should stay at home.

I hope that you do miss the worst of it, although I would say that the data shows that Alberta is on track to have it just as bad as everywhere else. https://infogram.com/covid-19-cases-in- ... kvxe8gj4oy

Any success that is had, is because people are staying home. Just today Jason Kenney revealed the government projections that as many as 800,000 Albertans will get the virus, and 3,000 of them will die. But that later number goes up if people don't obey the restrictions in place.

Yes, the risk to you and your family goes up by you doing your job (and I thank you for that). But I think what many are failing to realize is that the goal isn't to not get the virus (because that's not really avoidable). The goal is to make sure that too many people don't get it too fast, so that our hospitals are not overwhelmed. Doing your bit by staying home, helps make sure that by the time the virus gets to you, there will still be hospital beds, ventilators, and hopefully not too many burned out medical staff to help you if you or your loved ones need it.

I'm going to take a break, because I find these discussions frustrating, that people aren't willing to give up a little bit of convenience for the lives of their friends and family, because that is what it comes down to. People you know will get this illness, and it's highly likely that people you know will die from it. The fact that it hasn't happened yet, is simply a matter of probability. With friends and family working in the hospitals, and as an "essential worker" myself - albeit in the food safety realm, I find the lax attitude perplexing and frustrating.

FYI Mark, your provincial numbers aren't quite accurate for whatever that's worth to readers. In Manitoba today they added 13 new cases. Over the past week new daily cases have varied from 1 yesterday to about 30 several days ago. Biggest jumps were in the last few days of March, hopefully we're seeing a flattening now with the decrease from 30s to 10s. Anyway, average here these days seems to be around 10 new cases/day for now. Total MB cases now will be getting near 250 confirmed cases. I have no idea whether that's good or bad or will get better or worse, just sharing the actual numbers. All I do know is that health leaders and residents of rural areas seem to prefer that campers and cottages stay home for now.

Don't think I have anything more to add either. Hopefully the discussion was useful to some.

Cheers, Pat.

_________________
Learning to paddle is like learning a language:
It's easy to learn the basics, but will you be understood in a strong wind?