www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

David M:
It's also going to be damaging to health and well being in ways not related to the virus - [1]domestic abuse, [2]depression, [3]sunlight deprivation, [4]alcoholism, [5]obesity, etc...

[1] I am unlikely to be a victim of or be a perpetrator
[2] Possible but I’m keeping very busy
[3} Plenty of sun up here. But tolerating the wind might be more problematic.
[4] Just had an alcohol-free evening. I enjoy it but can take it or leave it
[5] Obesity. I had already ticked that box

Cheery sunset 28 March from back garden. Jack

Update advice.

The restrictions did not originally state whether people could use their car to get to, say, a beauty spot in order to take exercise. However, the government has now said that people should "stay local" and use open spaces near their home. Several police forces have tried to discourage people from making non-essential journeys, fearing that it could encourage overcrowding - and with it, the spread of the virus. The RAC has also advised drivers only to make essential journeys.

I interpret that as meaning that I can (and will) go out in my car - but stay inside the car if anyone else about - to a near(ish) spot so that I can enjoy the Skylarks, watch the waves crashing onto the rocks and in due course, visit an Orange Tip hotspot and make a short walk - that's all I can manage these days in any case.

This will be good for my health - my mentai health.

Jack

It looks like the police have been told to wind their necks in, after dyeing a lake black, criticising shopkeepers for selling Easter eggs, and issuing a summons to someone for "buying non-essential items":

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... d-sumption

The Guardian has learned that the National Police Chiefs Council and College of Policing (NPCC) is rushing through guidance reminding officers that despite politicians’ warnings they cannot bar people from going for a run or a drive.

It will state that while certain actions such as driving to exercise may be unwise, they are not prohibited by the emergency powers, according to sources with knowledge of detailed discussions. It is also expected to conclude the law does not restrict people to leaving their home to exercise just once a day.

Cheers
John

This is the actual police video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbvWniX ... e=youtu.be

Mental health? No such thing accoridng to the Derbyshire police.

Jack

I am happy to cut the police some slack. They were overstretched and under-resourced before COVID-19, and now many of them will be ill with it, or self-isolating because they have symptoms, further depleting their numbers. When they are working they will be interacting with members of the public, any one of which may have COVID-19 - how must that make them feel? Now they have a bunch of new rules to work with, implemented quickly and while the service is under duress. Given all of that, I can understand a variable interpretation of those new guidelines and laws. I wish them all the best, thank them deeply for what they do and for keeping me safe.

I totally agree and I couldn't add to what you so eloquently wrote Nick.

We are actually fortunate to still be able to pursue this interest / hobby within the Government rules. Think about the number of hobbies that others have that cannot or should not be pursued at present. I have a whole cluster of other interests / hobbies that I can't pursue. However, that is totally insignificant at present. Stay indoors, protect the NHS and save lives.

Otep wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 6:51 pm We are actually fortunate to still be able to pursue this interest / hobby within the Government rules. Think about the number of hobbies that others have that cannot or should not be pursued at present.

Indeed! There may be very few of us who get to see a Large Blue or Chequered Skipper this year, but the majority should be able to find the likes of Peacock, Small Tortoiseshell, Holly Blue and (with luck!) Orange-tip.

My pre-Covid 19 plans throughout winter for what is my first ever butterfly season was to travel around the UK a bit to go and find a few species that aren't in Derbyshire. This was only to be casually done and on a whim rather than a concerted effort to see as many species as I could. Top of the list was a trip to the Norfolk Broads to see you know what.

I have a feeling that this weekend might see a few media photos of people enjoying themselves in ways that they have been asked not to for the foreseeable. It seems strange to me that people can't give up a few weeks of their life to preserve the years they have left and the years that other people have left.

It seems strange to me that people can't give up a few weeks of their life to preserve the years they have left and the years that other people have left.

Think on this Otep. I am old (81) severe arthritis and can't have that many years remaining. Of those few years, not all of which I can expect to be able to get out and about, this lost year is a huge proportion of what I do have left. This lock down is hurting me very hard indeed.

Jack

I am really sorry to read of the great distress that this is bringing to you Jack. I recognise that the mental anguish is extremely hard to deal with. Hopefully within the restrictions associated with the lock down you are still managing to find some comfort from nature.

Thanks, but the personal aspect is not my only concern. One of my sons is now put on pay which comes nowhere near his committed outgoings. He hasn't a clue how to solve this one. My daughter has lost the future she had planned.

The damage to society is unprecedented. I am an oldie so what I now say will seem shocking.

I am almost inclined to think it might have been better to let sick and already ailing people die – and that could have included me – to preserve the world for later generations. That is how nature in the raw would be for any other species.

Jack

Trouble is, a lot of younger people,including doctors and nurses, are now dying of it too. And not just those with underlying health problems, either.

Jack Harrison wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:34 pmI am almost inclined to think it might have been better to let sick and already ailing people die – and that could have included me – to preserve the world for later generations. That is how nature in the raw would be for any other species.

I had a similar conversation with one of my closest friends (who is 73) the other day. She said that had this happened 100 years ago it would hardly be killing anybody, because most of those who are casualties today are people who would not have been around with their current health conditions a century ago, i.e. they are alive today because of significant advances in modern medicine which were not available in 1920.

That said, if we were to pursue that approach, you would see countless others die who are NOT suffering from the virus because health care systems would be so overwhelmed that those unfortunate enough to suffer serious but, under normal circumstances, survivable accidents/injuries/maladies would not get prompt and timely treatment.

The death of young and previously fit is one of the greatest disasters. Humans are in effect trying beat the natural processes so the health workers become victims.

Jack

Virtual butterflying with a computer "art" program.Please click on image to see in all its beauty.
Jack

Very nice, Jack. Is this a "digital painting", or a filtered photograph? Whilst looking at it, it occurred to me that filtered photos could be a great way to salvage something from those (many, many) frustrating occasions when the 'perfect' shot turns out to be slightly out of focus once viewed on the PC screen...

It's made with software called Dynamic Auto-Painter using the Re-Acrylic program (many other options).

Yes it could be a useful trick to sharpen and at the same time de-clutter the background. I hadn't thought of that.

Jack

According to the BBC, some new guidance has been issued to Police Forces in respect of what is reasonable in terms of travelling to undertake daily exercise:

"...driving somewhere to exercise is acceptable as long as "far more time" is spent walking than driving..."

Open to interpretation, but it could perhaps alleviate the monotony and restrictiveness of one's local patch.

Dave

"...driving somewhere to exercise is acceptable as long as "far more time" is spent walking than driving..."

Doesn't help me very much being arthritic and unable to walk for more than about 20 minutes without a rest.

So let me work that out. Nairn harbour pier, where I like to walk in normal times, is about 8 miles away. So to be within my 20 minutes physical walking limit, I would need to do those 8 miles in 10 minutes. Now 2 of those miles are in a 30 mph speed limit which even if I were able to maintain 30, would take 4 minutes. So the other 6 would need to be done in 6 minutes on country lanes. I suppose I could give it a try…….

Jack

millerd wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2020 1:35 pm According to the BBC, some new guidance has been issued to Police Forces in respect of what is reasonable in terms of travelling to undertake daily exercise:

"...driving somewhere to exercise is acceptable as long as "far more time" is spent walking than driving..."

Open to interpretation, but it could perhaps alleviate the monotony and restrictiveness of one's local patch.

Yes. Clocked this today myself, Dave.

Can't find a link to the actual document, otherwise I'd print it off and carry it with me in the car just in case.

My butterfly walks are usually 1.5 to 2 hours long, and I can get to plenty of good spots in half an hour or less.