Lantley wrote:
Sorry camping is not a foolproof or shall I say virus proof activity.
Every interaction creates a chance for spread.
The idea of shutting down won't eliminate the virus but it will slow the spread to a manageable level and keep the hospitals being overwhelmed.
In order to go camping you need food and fuel at a minimum. At some point you need to interact to obtain those items. Worst case scenario you get a flat and require assistance or you simply fall and require assistance.
Now I agree the chances of these worst case scenarios happening all minimal.
But there are fire houses stationed in every town because we know unexpected injuries happen.
Coach net, AAA and Good Sam's are all thriving roadside plans because there will be break downs.
But none of this happens If you stay home. There's no what if gamble.
Shutting down the campground forces everyone to stay home which is the objective.
Social distances does not mean going to a distant, area and then isolating yourself. It's the getting there that creates the potential for spread.
Now if there is spread say, from a New Yorker going camping in some Rhode Island to get away from it all.
You created a big mess and a worse case scenario by potentially contaminating some small town with limited resources.
None of this happens if you stay home.
Unfortunately we can't trust the public to voluntarily stay home so the government has to enact measures to force them to stay home.
but that still doesn't address the needs of fulltimers who ARE home and snowbirds trying to GET home. if the parks close...which they are...and those folks are given the boot just where are they 'sposed to go??