What age should a person start riding on the road??

DonDaddyD

Hear me out here. Because I'm challenging all those that simply say 'cyclists' shouldn't be on the pavement.

While I understand that most cyclists should ride on the road, what age should one expect to start riding on the road?

Personally I think it is unfair to enforce anyone who is too young to legally apply for a drivers licence (so 16-17) to ride on the road. Encouraged, yes, enforced and threatened with a fine, no. This happened to 13/14yr olds and generally young teenagers in Norbury (South London). Community Support Officers were telling them to go on the main road, A23 London Road, and its always busy and fast.

However, even with this I'm in two minds because my 15yr old brother is taller than me and has gotten my Giant Escape hybrid up to 24-26mph downhill. He is also 12stone (though a athlete and therefore blessed with being svelte) so if he should crash into a pedestrain it wouldn't be pretty. At this point, I should mention he rides on the road. Yet under any other cicrumstance, whether behind the wheel of a car or on a motorised bike and or moped, legally he wouldn't be allowed to be on the road. But in arguably the most vulnerable form of road going transport he is told to ride on the road. He has no concept of the road and nor should he because he cannot even apply for a provisional drivers licence yet.

Fact is cycle training isn't compulsory and we don't expect anyone under the age of 16 (moped) or 17 (car) to be on the road in a road legal vehicle. Therefore I don't think you can expect to ask anyone under that age to not ride on the pavement. It's not safe for them to do so and its less safe to push them onto the road on a bikt. Therefore the need is to make the roads safer for them or give them the training to be safe.

fenboy369

I think the easiest way would be to have a law that states the fastest you can ride on the pavement is at walking pace. (There must be a definition of walkimg pace somewhere).
Couple that with a 16 plus must be on the road, 10-16 unaccompanied on the path, but on the road with an adult. Below 10 on the path, but walking speed max.
It would also need proper cycle paths, not shared use ones, and a willingness from the Police to actually police it. In both directions, look after cyclists, peds and cars.
Its not an easy question (but its a damned good one), and there is no easy answer.

lost_in_thought

Actually, DDD, I think this is a really good question. I mean, yes, cycling on the pavement is illegal, but there's a certain size of child that it's excusable in.

I say size because I'm a dreadful judge of age... and I'd say the size is sort of below waist height.

However, it's also rather dependant on location. Round here in Essex, for example, I regularly see kids that must be 7 or 8 riding around on the road, and lots of teenagers doing paper rounds (you have to be 13 for one of those, right?) on the road. A friend has an 8 and a 10 year old, who cycle on the road, and that in her words is 'how they learn road sense'.

But drivers are very sympathetic round here, people who've come and visited me have commented on it, and letting your kids learn road sense like that if you lived in Knightsbridge would probably be a bad idea.

What age do they do cycle proficiency in schools? I think I was 11 when I did mine...

amnezia

The problem is that some groups of young teenagers choose to cycle like lunatics on busy pavements. Should they be allowed to?

I agree that the law should be applied with common sense.

Onan

I know it's illegal, but I think it's a rather ridiculous and unenforcable law.

Maybe with appropriate behaviour from motorists to make the roads a safer place to ride, and/or proper cycle facilities, and free, accessable training in road safety provided for children, maybe through schools, we would have a situation in which it would be safe to get children off the pavements. Even then, it's only a maybe. You can't drive a car until you're 17, and even then, young motorists are still killed in much greater numbers than older drivers. You're already 7 times more likely to die on a bicycle than you are in a car. I think it's safe to assume that putting children on the roads on bikes would result in a disproportionate number of them being involved in accidents.

As it stands, enforcing the law would just result in lots of very poor cyclists, with very little confidence, no knowledge of road craft, often no lights, and unsafe bicycles being thrown into the mix with incosiderate drivers used to battling it out on the roads with skilled, confident, defensive cyclists.

I'm not saying the ideal situation isn't for everyone on a bicycle to be on the road. I'm just saying a lot needs to change before that can happen.

The real result of the law being enforced without those changes being made of course would simply be that an entire generation of children would stop cycling. Either because they themselves do not feel safe mixing it with traffic, or because their parents won't let them.

Onan

In answer to the question, I said 18 plus. That's how old a child in my family would have to be before I felt comfortable with them cycling on the road.

Until then, I would tell them to use the pavement, use segregated cycle paths where available, and ride slowly and cautiously. I don't know about a walking pace, but certainly a jogging pace.

I also give the same advice to adults who are complete beginners. I think it's fair to assume it will take most people some time to build up the confidence and the skills to cycle on the road. It certainly did me.

tomb353

my understanding is that under 16's can't be penalised for riding on the pavement, so are quite able to tell the pcso to get lost.

I'm teaching my 8 year old to use the road gradually, but would want her to keep the option of pavement cycling for a good few years yet. Maybe drop it to 14 and put a speed restriction in place?

I think the reason a lot of non-cyclists bang on about "pavement lycra louts" etc is that they are seeing kids on the pavements and are unable to distinguish them from young adults.

chuckcork

tomb353 wrote:

I think the reason a lot of non-cyclists bang on about "pavement lycra louts" etc is that they are seeing kids on the pavements and are unable to distinguish them from young adults.

...or able to distinguish them from obviously older riders on road bikes on the road either. If a 12 year knocks down an OAP we're all looking bad, whether its deserved or not.

snailracer

What if....a doddery old granny is riding on the pavement? Who would tell her to ride on the road? I wouldn't.

This poll is asking the wrong question. I would tell someone who is riding inconsiderately to get off the pavement and ride on the road, their age is irrelevent to me.

turnerjohn

snailracer wrote:

What if....a doddery old granny is riding on the pavement? Who would tell her to ride on the road? I wouldn't.

This poll is asking the wrong question. I would tell someone who is riding inconsiderately to get off the pavement and ride on the road, their age is irrelevent to me.

To be fair "doddery old granny" dont often actually ride bikes, and if they do their not stable :roll: ! their normally terrorising other people in their buggys ! ...ha now thats left for a different thread I feel !

ketka82

This is a really good question and one that is open to a lot of debate.

Most parents I know actively encourage their children to cycle on the pavements, even well into their late teens. Hell, my mum would have me riding on the pavement if it were up to her and I'm 27!

I can understand parents' concerns and personally I have no problem with young children riding on pavements - despite the fact that as a pedestrian I've been hit twice by over-enthusiastic pre-teen BMXers! But I do think they should be encouraged to ride safely and slowly. Trouble is, the words safely and slowly don't mean much to a lot of 12 year-old boys!

As DDD points out, kids are too young to apply for a drivers license. They don't necessarily have a knowledge of road signs, signals and markings. To be fair neither do a lot of drivers but that's for another thread....

This is why it drives me insane when I see things like give-way markings on cycle paths. How on earth are most non-drivers supposed to know what a give-way marking is?! It's stupid.

Not having any children myself I don't know what the situation is in schools these days. Is cycling proficiency obligatory?

deptfordmarmoset

Is cycling proficiency obligatory?

As far as I understand it, cycling proficiency has been replaced by ''bikeability'' - www.bikeability.org.uk/

It's not obligatory - I don't think it was when I was a kid, either - but many primary schools participate, offering courses for 9-11 year olds. Availability will depend on your local authority.

saracen fan

To be fair "doddery old granny" dont often actually ride bikes, and if they do their not stable ! their normally terrorising other people in their buggys !

I work in the mobility trade, (yes I supply grannys with scooters but unlike alot of companys we actually make sure there compitant enough to operate them or we wont sell), all scooters that are pavement use only are restricted to 4mph, I assume this speed limit would apply to cycles which as we all know doing 4mph on a bike is nigh on impossible, which is why we are told to rode on road.......

but back to the point, im 23 and there are some roads I wont ride on, far to busy, HGV's roaring past and high winds blowing me about. stuff that, im not getting killed on the road because im not meant to ride on the pavement. I ride sensibly and carefully when on pavements, limiting myself to 10mph for the short periods I do get on a pavement.

1664

do any of the posters on here have kids :?:

I wouldnt wish for any of my kids to travel on some roads and I positively encourage them to travel on the pavement..safely of course and with respect for other pavement users.

As DDD states there are clearly some people on here (bentmikey etc) who think its a requirement for a 10 year old to hop on an A road without any training and risk death

every local authority puts a price on an injury / fatal road traffic accident, fatal over £1 million for example...hence the grey area where the law is circumvent...as for an age 16 would be about right

Agent57

Much of it comes down to the riding and observational skills of the child, and the amount of traffic on the roads they are cycling. Some quieter roads might be OK for a 10-year-old, while busier ones less so. On the other hand, some 10-year-olds may cope with traffic and bike handling better than, say, some 14-year-olds. I was cycling on the main roads by the time I was 10, or earlier. But that was 30 years ago, and traffic was less dense.

Both of my children (7 and 11) often use the roads on our local estate. It's quiet, and there are no through roads, so it's not used as a rat run.

If the traffic were heavier, I'd tell my 7 year old to use the pavement. He doesn't have good enough observational skills, or high enough awareness to mix it with heavier traffic, and he's not particularly good at maintaining a predictable line. As he gets older, I'll take him out riding with me so he can learn what I do. I hope that by the time he's entering secondary school, he has good enough bike handling skills, and enough road awareness to ride on them reasonably safely.

I think the roads to be free for cyclists to use, but I wouldn't throw my hands up in horror for some certificate of competence to be required before a person is allowed to cycle on the roads. (On the other hand, I would definitely make a big noise if there were any move to remove cyclists from the roads, or contrain us to cycle lanes.)

prj45

IIRC prosecution guidelines state kids under 16 and on the pavement are never prosecuted.

tailwindhome

Depends on the child, the pavement and the road

Fenboy wrote:

Its not an easy question (but its a damned good one), and there is no easy answer.

My daughter is 7, the stablisers came off the bike in the summer and she was upgraded to a 20" bike which she is only just learning to ride with confidence. We recently rode 3 mile to the next town for an ice cream, using a combination of; both of us on shared cyclepath, both of us on the footpath (single file, me behind*), her on the footpath& me on the road or both of us on the road as appropriate. We also got off and walked when we encountered pedestrians, for both their safety and ours.

I believe this is a sensible approach

There is a world of difference between a child on a child's bike and a 16 year old 'hoodie' tearing round on a MTB.





* If you ever want to improve your bike handling skills ride 'clipped in' behind a nervous 7 year old.

redddraggon

It's well and good saying they can cycle on the footpath because it's safer, but most of the little knobbers don't stop on the footpath, they dive on onto the road without and then dive back on the footpath, they cross from one side of the road to the other without looking.

When I've been riding I've nearly been taken out a few times with them diving into my path without looking.

And that's why "cycling on the road" is dangerous, 'cus the little knobbers dive in front of cars.

1664

prj45 wrote:

IIRC prosecution guidelines state kids under 16 and on the pavement are never prosecuted.

not true

Jay dubbleU

I started riding a bike when I was 8 and rode 2 miles to school and back every day accompanied by my dad - we always rode on the road and it gave me confidence and an almost instinctive road sense. Admittedly there was perhaps less traffic about then but I think its better for children to learn roadcraft at an early age rather than suddenly be catapulted onto the road in mid teens with no experience and an undeveloped spidery sense - I think Wheezy has the right approach - give kids confidence when they're around an adult rather than just leave them to get on with it

Matt the Tester

i voted 14-17 but i WOULDN'T approve of a 14 year old riding on the road i would be more comfortable if someone aged 16 or 17 was riding on the road in a very sensible manner

ThreeLionsBrian

i actually saw a group of "Knobbers" shoot across a main road and dart between traffic on the other side. The last one was struck by a car. Totally the "knobbers" fault! BUT the drivers reaction was carry on slowly shunting the bike and the child off the road and drove off. I was willing to be a witness for both sides although both were as bad as each other?

shouldbeinbed

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Depends on the child, the pavement and the road

Fenboy wrote:

Its not an easy question (but its a damned good one), and there is no easy answer.

My daughter is 7, the stablisers came off the bike in the summer and she was upgraded to a 20" bike which she is only just learning to ride with confidence. We recently rode 3 mile to the next town for an ice cream, using a combination of; both of us on shared cyclepath, both of us on the footpath (single file, me behind*), her on the footpath& me on the road or both of us on the road as appropriate. We also got off and walked when we encountered pedestrians, for both their safety and ours.

I believe this is a sensible approach

There is a world of difference between a child on a child's bike and a 16 year old 'hoodie' tearing round on a MTB.





* If you ever want to improve your bike handling skills ride 'clipped in' behind a nervous 7 year old.

Spot on, my 10 y.o. and quite slight of build is a natural on his bike, can handle it and is a considerate thinking rider. I do not make him ride on the road and as yet I still ensure that me or big Bro (19 and experienced road cyclist) are with him

He chooses to ride the road and does it well. who am I to wrap him in cotton wool and ban him from something he's proving perfectly capable of?

roger_merriman

piece of string.

I rode off and on road from quite a young age, but the lanes are very quiet and narrow so fast cars is a impossiblity unlike say some of the roads in london.

I'd say it's something if done should be done with respect for walkers.

I'm say one of the dangers of kids doing it is learning bad habbits.

Hrun

I was brought up in London and was not allowed out on my own until I did my cycle proficiency test.

This taught me road craft relevant to riding a bike on the road as the driving licence should do for a car driver.

Not having kids I don't know if this still exists, but surely it is the parents responsibility to ensure their offspring are competent to deal with a situation, is that not the primary role of a parent?

Pokerface

I didn't realize you are allowed to ride on the pavement at ANY age.

But then again, I'm 38 and still do from time to time.

ThreeLionsBrian

it exists , my youngest has just finished Bikeability 2 but what happens with 3 i dont know yet he hasn't brought the paperwork home yet. I don't know what's best, with all the skills in the world you still have the motorist to deal with.

shouldbeinbed

Hrun wrote:

...

Not having kids I don't know if this still exists, but surely it is the parents responsibility to ensure their offspring are competent to deal with a situation, is that not the primary role of a parent?

yes the cycling proficiency still exists - same 10y.o has just completed it via Bikeability and School. It's still optional but Bikeability did provide bikes for thse kids that wanted to do the course but didnt have a bike.

agree completely with the last sentiments too.

sicknote

I have two kids but my daughter does not ride much now.
My son does ride with me when we go training and I have tried ( which he does ) to get him to ride on the road with me as I want him to be ready for Skyride next year, which he is looking forward too.

I would not let him ride on the road on his own but with me he is doing a good job at it.

He is 9 and my daughter is 11

I will be looking into Bikeability for him too.