Barriers to Cycling

Tom Crispin said:

I have been asked to give a 50 minute presentation to headteachers at
a School Travel Plan conference on 5 March.

I plan to start by showing an inspirational 10 minute slide show of
children learning to cycle and cycling, with the background music of
Katie Melua's 9m Bicycles (in Beijing) and Queen's Bicycle Race.

You're giving over 20% of your presentation to multimedia bumpf? Some
would call this brave. I would maybe go with "stupid". Your audience is
going to be fidgeting after 2 minutes, and there's no way they're going to
pay attention to 10 minutes of it. How exactly do you intend to hold their
attention with the slides? How will those visuals play out? They will play
out like this: "Oh, it's a child on a bike. Another child on a bike. Some
more children on bikes. Single child on bike. Child and parent on bike."
People will drift off and you've lost audience buy-in before you've
started.

If you really, really must do this, do it as a framing device. One song at
the beginning, one at the end. But I would like to point out there are
not 9 million bicycles in Beijing.

Quoted message said:

I then want to examine barriers to children cycling to school, and
convince the headteachers that these are not barriers, simply excuses.

Ah, you have a lot of faith in rationality. People smoke and drink and are
scared of terrorism, even though the first two do horrific things to the
body and more people die of just about any other cause than terrorism.
People's feelings are powerful motivators, and they are not going to be
convinced if you sit there and tell them that they're wrong over and over
again. They're going to be actively hostile. Especially if you tell them
they're making excuses.

Perhaps a better format would be to outline your goal first, and why it is
a worthy goal. In this case, your goal is to increase the number of
children cycling to school. You can put hard numbers in if they're
sciencey headteachers - say, 10% increase over 6 months. You also want to
explain why it's a good goal - why should kids cycle to school? You can
talk about the health benefits and the freedom and the responsibility
here. If you can work a cost benefit or target benefit in there, then do
that as well. Can the school reduce the number of sick days taken through
cycling? Can they improve community relations by causing less congestion
around the school run? How will cycling help the school's goals?

Then - and only then, once they know what you want, why you want it, and
how it benefits *them* - you can talk about misconceptions. Present the
misconceptions, then lightly go over the statistics and heavily go over
what you're going to do about it.

To take your example of the "inherent danger" of cycling. Mention the
stats if you must, but you want to focus on how you're going to reduce the
danger. The local council will subsidise helmets[1] and reflectors. You'll
run cycling proficiency courses for free. The local police will come and
do a road safety assembly.

Really, you're hitting two obstacles. The first is apathy - why bother
doing anything? It's much easier to do nothing. They need to see a clear
benefit to them. This can be selfish, like they'll get less work, to
moderately selfish, like it'll help them meet their school's targets or
it'll give them warm fuzzy feelings in their tummy, to selfless, like
it'll help the environment. Note that environmental help is closely tied
to the warm fuzzies, so don't put too much stock in the selfless category.

The other problem is the work involved. You need to give them clear plans
on how to go about achieving their goals. The less they have to think and
the less they have to do, the better. Make it easy.

Oh, one other thing your presentation will have to cover is how they're
going to get more pupils cycling - which means how they're going to
convince parents. And this is where statistics really don't help you,
because you could show that nobody's EVER been killed on a bicycle but Mrs
Miggins isn't going to let dear little Johnny cycle to school in all that
dangerous traffic. I think this is going to be the biggest obstacle you
face, and should probably be at least 20 minutes of your presentation. If
you can't convince the parents, the teachers will say "It's a lovely idea,
but there's no point doing all this because nobody's cycling to school."

Anyway, these are my thoughts. I hope they're useful.

[1] It doesn't matter whether or not helmets are safe; it's a perception
thing only.

--
Alex Pounds (Creature) .~. http://www.alexpounds.com/
/V\ http://www.ethicsgirls.com/
// \\
"Variables won't; Constants aren't" /( )\
^`~'^

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:08:06 -0600, Creature <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tom Crispin said:

I have been asked to give a 50 minute presentation to headteachers at
a School Travel Plan conference on 5 March.

I plan to start by showing an inspirational 10 minute slide show of
children learning to cycle and cycling, with the background music of
Katie Melua's 9m Bicycles (in Beijing) and Queen's Bicycle Race.

You're giving over 20% of your presentation to multimedia bumpf? Some
would call this brave. I would maybe go with "stupid". Your audience is
going to be fidgeting after 2 minutes, and there's no way they're going to
pay attention to 10 minutes of it. How exactly do you intend to hold their
attention with the slides? How will those visuals play out? They will play
out like this: "Oh, it's a child on a bike. Another child on a bike. Some
more children on bikes. Single child on bike. Child and parent on bike."
People will drift off and you've lost audience buy-in before you've
started.

I first showed it at the London School's Travel Conference last year.
I had a spontaneous clap. More recently I showed it to three members
of the Children and Young People's Select Committee for the London
Borough of Lewisham. They invited me to share it with the Full
Committee at a meeting last week. Again, it went down well.

Besides, It has been specifically requested that I share the show with
them by the Road Safety Officer.

Quoted message said:

If you really, really must do this, do it as a framing device. One song at
the beginning, one at the end. But I would like to point out there are
not 9 million bicycles in Beijing.

One at the beginning and one at the end is a good idea.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I then want to examine barriers to children cycling to school, and
convince the headteachers that these are not barriers, simply excuses.

Ah, you have a lot of faith in rationality. People smoke and drink and are
scared of terrorism, even though the first two do horrific things to the
body and more people die of just about any other cause than terrorism.
People's feelings are powerful motivators, and they are not going to be
convinced if you sit there and tell them that they're wrong over and over
again. They're going to be actively hostile. Especially if you tell them
they're making excuses.

Perhaps a better format would be to outline your goal first, and why it is
a worthy goal. In this case, your goal is to increase the number of
children cycling to school. You can put hard numbers in if they're
sciencey headteachers - say, 10% increase over 6 months. You also want to
explain why it's a good goal - why should kids cycle to school? You can
talk about the health benefits and the freedom and the responsibility
here. If you can work a cost benefit or target benefit in there, then do
that as well. Can the school reduce the number of sick days taken through
cycling? Can they improve community relations by causing less congestion
around the school run? How will cycling help the school's goals?

Then - and only then, once they know what you want, why you want it, and
how it benefits *them* - you can talk about misconceptions. Present the
misconceptions, then lightly go over the statistics and heavily go over
what you're going to do about it.

To take your example of the "inherent danger" of cycling. Mention the
stats if you must, but you want to focus on how you're going to reduce the
danger. The local council will subsidise helmets[1] and reflectors. You'll
run cycling proficiency courses for free. The local police will come and
do a road safety assembly.

Really, you're hitting two obstacles. The first is apathy - why bother
doing anything? It's much easier to do nothing. They need to see a clear
benefit to them. This can be selfish, like they'll get less work, to
moderately selfish, like it'll help them meet their school's targets or
it'll give them warm fuzzy feelings in their tummy, to selfless, like
it'll help the environment. Note that environmental help is closely tied
to the warm fuzzies, so don't put too much stock in the selfless category.

The other problem is the work involved. You need to give them clear plans
on how to go about achieving their goals. The less they have to think and
the less they have to do, the better. Make it easy.

Oh, one other thing your presentation will have to cover is how they're
going to get more pupils cycling - which means how they're going to
convince parents. And this is where statistics really don't help you,
because you could show that nobody's EVER been killed on a bicycle but Mrs
Miggins isn't going to let dear little Johnny cycle to school in all that
dangerous traffic. I think this is going to be the biggest obstacle you
face, and should probably be at least 20 minutes of your presentation. If
you can't convince the parents, the teachers will say "It's a lovely idea,
but there's no point doing all this because nobody's cycling to school."

Anyway, these are my thoughts. I hope they're useful.

Thanks for your thoughts. You have a great many interesting points
for me to consider.

One thing that you have missed is that I have already achieved a great
deal at the school where I am a teacher.

National Standard Cycle Training is now part of our school's
curriculum:
-Basic cycle skills training for all Year 2 (ages 6/7) pupils.
-On-road cycle training for all Year 4 (ages 8/9) pupils.
-Further on-road training, including complex junctions such as
lights and mini-roubndabouts, and night-time cycling for Year 6 (ages
10/11) pupils as an extra-curricular activity.

Next year I plan to cycle the Year 5 (ages 9/10) pupils to and from
their weekly swimming lessons. They currently travel the 2 miles each
way by coach.

Take a look at a few of my photos at:
http://www.johnballcycling.org.uk/photos/

Not all are cycling related. I tend to upload photos there when I
want to share them with friends. All have been resized, and the
largest is 260k.

Tom Crispin wrote on 31/01/2007 23:00 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I then want to put together a Powerpoint which will list the barriers,
one per page, and then reveal convincing arguments for them not being
a barrier.

For example:

Cycling in inherently dangerous.

Government statistics show that per kilometre travelled, cycling is
safer than walking.
Last year there were *** pedestrian deaths per billion km compared
with *** cyclist deaths.
For the last 18 months, there has not been a single child cyclist
death in London.

I would start with the well proven basic principles of Kurt Lewin's
Change Management. You don't confront their beliefs - that leads to
dismissal or rationalisation of the new information to support existing
beliefs (disconfirming information). What you need to do is make their
current position seem uncomfortable (unfreezing) then offer the vision
of a safer place which is where you want them to end up. So throwing
those numbers at them will tend to entrench them - we all see that when
we explain the blindingly obvious to a numpty motorist who has cut us up
and they rationalise their behaviour rather than admit they were wrong.

You could perhaps start with something simple but emotive like the
expanding congestion charging zones in London and the need to offer
alternatives. Or "Do you know what the exhausts of all those cars
dropping off at the school gates are exposing our children to? All have
done short journeys on cold engines so burning fuel rich mixtures and
with catalytic converters not up to temperature and therefore not
controlling emissions (can you get the local MoT centre to run you off
the emissions test for a stone cold engine for example to compare with
the MoT pass figures and the reason why those emission controls are
required by law and tested annually).

Then you can introduce the solution of cycling but point out that it
needs a structured training programme for pupils (which they've started
to do so feel good), bike sheds (which they've started to do so feel
good), incentives and other measures to encourage parents to get their
children to cycle to school etc.

Perhaps end up with all schools are going to have to go this way in time
as road pricing and congestion controls escalate and while it won't be
easy being the pioneers they can be the leaders for the future -
generating a bit of team spirit where the adversities they will face
become positive challenges rather than negative barriers.

Wrap it with a starter of a video of congested dropping off intercut
with cold car exhausts pumping out visible fumes and dripping water and
pictures of harassed pupils being hurried out of cars. End with your
video of children thoroughly enjoying cycle training, children with
bikes standing chatting to their friends and happily cycling home on the
roads.

Just my £0.02

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Tom Crispin said:

I have been asked to give a 50 minute presentation to headteachers at
a School Travel Plan conference on 5 March.

My remit is broad.

I plan to start by showing an inspirational 10 minute slide show of
children learning to cycle and cycling, with the background music of
Katie Melua's 9m Bicycles (in Beijing) and Queen's Bicycle Race.

I then want to examine barriers to children cycling to school, and
convince the headteachers that these are not barriers, simply excuses.

Tom,

it might be worth getting in touch with a school local to me - Kesgrave
(near Ipswich) and asking how they do it. Its a secondary school with an
incredibly high (for the UK) cycling rate. The school sits fronting
directly onto a major radial road from Ipswich, on the "wrong side" compared
to 95%++ of the pupil's homes, etc...
Some of the high rate is helped by the design of the newer housing estate at
Kesgrave which has cycle routes, but quite a lot has got to be down to
school policies, school encouragement, etc..

Sorry, but that's about the limit of my knowledge; no children or relatives
at the school. Google throws up lots of relevant links.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

Tony Raven said the following on 01/02/2007 08:28:

Quoted message said:

All have
done short journeys on cold engines so burning fuel rich mixtures and
with catalytic converters not up to temperature and therefore not
controlling emissions

That is a very valid point worth bringing up. A lot of people have a
mistaken perception that cars these days have so much emission control
that the fumes don't really do any harm. This is only really true (the
'emission control' bit, not the 'no harm' bit) for an engine up to
temperature, and as Tony points out, on a short school run the engines
aren't up to temperature. The cold engine MOT test suggested by Tony is
well worth it, I would have thought - real numbers that can be related
to a real car with a cold engine compared to a hot engine has got to
drive the point home, hasn't it?

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Off the cuff, one aspect I hear cited as a reason for the school run is the
fear that society is not safe for a child on his or her own. "Paedophiles
around every corner" seems to be the modern "reds under the beds" - and
this is on top of fears that little Jessica will be run over by a big, bad
car.

So, a solution? To address such fears, the children need to be escorted, or
at least travel in groups. I love the concept of walking buses and wonder
whether that can be extended to cycling - with health benefits for the
parents on escort duty? No doubt, someone will come along soon and rip this
concept to bits - but at least it's an idea for a fun way to get kids on
their bikes. In the meantime, I'll start the ripping process myself. The
last time my wife took some kids on a sponsored cycle ride, the police had
to be notified and they imposed a group size limit of five including the
responsible adult. So perhaps sounding out such an idea with the regional
constabulary might be good if "bike buses" appeal to you.

HTH

Following on from Tom Crispin's message. . .

Quoted message said:

I have been asked to give a 50 minute presentation to headteachers at
a School Travel Plan conference on 5 March.

My remit is broad.

1 - Motivation
2 - Action

After 15 seconds of "We all know cycling is a good thing for health and
the environment" I'd ask for a show of hands at the start for how many
heads would like to see an increase of the amount of cycling at their
school.

*Their* issues are probably (as I think you know) school-based and
inertia driven "Oh we don't have any cycle racks" etc etc. (I speak
from a position of ignorance here but) I'd have two slides with
"problems" one with 'school' issues and the other with 'roads' issues.
Then cut straight to the payload of your message. Lots of people have
dealt with these, they're not insurmountable (and very worthwhile.)

Now show how it has been done at a couple of schools with smiley-faced
cherubs having fun and saying what's good about it. Plus it's another
opportunity to engage with pupils and parents eg bike maintenance for
thicko boys or carbon-bloody-footprints for soppy girls.

Now take questions. (This bit should be easy for you as a NS instructor
being used to interacting with your audience.) This segment allows you
to address specific issues direct which will be /the issues the heads
have/.

Finish with a round-up including
* Success factors
* How to get started

Somewhere I would also point out that a lot of problems are caused by
clueless and paranoid LA road safety officers.

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bolt company screwed up
[email hidden]
2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex <http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk>

Will Cove said the following on 01/02/2007 09:23:

Quoted message said:

Off the cuff, one aspect I hear cited as a reason for the school run is the
fear that society is not safe for a child on his or her own. "Paedophiles
around every corner" seems to be the modern "reds under the beds"

I don't have any figures, but I read somewhere ages ago that there are
no more paedophiles around now than there were 30 or 50 or 100 years
ago. The difference now is that as a society, we are now much more
aware of these dangers and more of them are getting caught, and that
awareness itself must actually make it safer than it used to be, not
more dangerous, surely? When I was at school, we all knew who the local
perverts were, and we just avoided them or took the [censored] out of them,
but they were visible and avoidable. Perhaps the current local perverts
are driven underground so that they are more dangerous than they used to
be, I don't know. I do know that I've just contradicted myself!

Quoted message said:

So, a solution? To address such fears, the children need to be escorted, or
at least travel in groups. I love the concept of walking buses and wonder
whether that can be extended to cycling - with health benefits for the
parents on escort duty? No doubt, someone will come along soon and rip this
concept to bits

No, I think it is an excellent idea. The odd child walking or cycling
to school is just another invisible person. A big group of hi-vis kids
does get treated differently - it seems to drive home the point that
these are vulnerable children, not just another nuisance in the way.

Quoted message said:

last time my wife took some kids on a sponsored cycle ride, the police had
to be notified and they imposed a group size limit of five including the
responsible adult.

Really? Why? What's the difference between that and a group ride that
happens to have a lot of kids in it?

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Tony Raven said:

What you need to do is make their
current position seem uncomfortable (unfreezing) then offer the vision
of a safer place which is where you want them to end up. So throwing
those numbers at them will tend to entrench them - we all see that when
we explain the blindingly obvious to a numpty motorist who has cut us up
and they rationalise their behaviour rather than admit they were wrong.

Agree with this...

Quoted message said:

You could perhaps start with something simple but emotive like the
expanding congestion charging zones in London and the need to offer
alternatives. Or "Do you know what the exhausts of all those cars
dropping off at the school gates are exposing our children to? All have
done short journeys on cold engines so burning fuel rich mixtures and
with catalytic converters not up to temperature and therefore not
controlling emissions (can you get the local MoT centre to run you off
the emissions test for a stone cold engine for example to compare with
the MoT pass figures and the reason why those emission controls are
required by law and tested annually).

But you are on dangerous (technical) ground here! Yes, emissions are
high from a cold start (I recall that 'most' - that is, of the
regulated emissions come out during the first 30-60s of the test
cycles), but after that they should (on a newish vehicle) be
relatively low. (Of course, CO2 does not follow this trend, but it's
not regulated...) Hence, if you are not careful, you will encourage
parents to buy new (Euro4 compliant) vehicles with lower exhaust
emissions..... I'd introduce global warming (which will be very
relevant to London in the next 20 years or so), along with a brief
mention of exhaust gas pollution, fat kids, vehicle congestion and
noise around schools, etc..

Quoted message said:

Then you can introduce the solution of cycling but point out that it
needs a structured training programme for pupils (which they've started
to do so feel good), bike sheds (which they've started to do so feel
good), incentives and other measures to encourage parents to get their
children to cycle to school etc.

Perhaps end up with all schools are going to have to go this way in time
as road pricing and congestion controls escalate and while it won't be
easy being the pioneers they can be the leaders for the future -
generating a bit of team spirit where the adversities they will face
become positive challenges rather than negative barriers.

Wrap it with a starter of a video of congested dropping off intercut
with cold car exhausts pumping out visible fumes

= hot water 🙁

Quoted message said:

and dripping water and
pictures of harassed

fat

Quoted message said:

pupils being hurried out of cars. End with your
video of children thoroughly enjoying cycle training, children with
bikes standing chatting to their friends and happily cycling home on the
roads.

As others have said, one of the main barriers is the 'cycling is
dangerous' mentality (along with the perceived risk from paedophiles /
terrorists / whatever the press have come up with this week) so some
stats, possibly the relevant long term health (obesity) ones, should
feature somewhere?

Whatever - good luck with the presentation.

Paul Boyd usenet.dont.work@plusnet said:

A lot of people have a
mistaken perception that cars these days have so much emission control
that the fumes don't really do any harm. This is only really true (the
'emission control' bit, not the 'no harm' bit) for an engine up to
temperature, and as Tony points out, on a short school run the engines
aren't up to temperature.

It's not the 'engine' that's important, just the exhaust catalyst.
Manufacturers go to great length to get the catalyst to 'light off' as
fast as possible. True, a cold engine (with functioning cat) will
emit more CO2 than a warm one (higher friction), but regulated exhaust
emissions are pretty well controlled after the first 60s (or less) on
a Euro4 vehicle. Doesn't mean that they don't pong at times though,
due to both unregulated emissions and the odd 'excursion' (due to the
operating condition being outside of the emissions test
envelope)......

Paul Boyd <usenet.dont.work@plusnet> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

last time my wife took some kids on a sponsored cycle ride, the
police had to be notified and they imposed a group size limit of five
including the responsible adult.

Really? Why? What's the difference between that and a group ride
that happens to have a lot of kids in it?

I have no idea. It was over a decade ago and the youth organisation rules
said that the police had to be informed. When she contacted the police they
turned all bureaucratic and imposed the limit on group size. They might
have held the opinion that all forty kids in one batch with an adult at
either end of the "crocodile" would constitute an unacceptable obstruction
- but I'm just speculating. Hopefully, Tom's local constabulary will have a
more-reasonable view.

squeaker said the following on 01/02/2007 10:51:

Quoted message said:

It's not the 'engine' that's important, just the exhaust catalyst.

I was using the term generically to cover anything underneath the car :-)

Quoted message said:

Manufacturers go to great length to get the catalyst to 'light off' as
fast as possible. True, a cold engine (with functioning cat) will
emit more CO2 than a warm one (higher friction), but regulated exhaust
emissions are pretty well controlled after the first 60s (or less) on
a Euro4 vehicle.

Euro4? (googles) Oh right. What percentage of cars on UK roads (or
specifically in London for Tom's case) are Euro4? I think any case
would come across better if applied to the typical car driven by the
school-run mum, rather than what might be perceived as a hypothetical
situation. "My new-ish car must be euro4, so it's OK to carry on the
school-run" might be the perception, ignoring all the other disadvantages!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Paul Boyd wrote on 01/02/2007 10:22 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I don't have any figures, but I read somewhere ages ago that there are
no more paedophiles around now than there were 30 or 50 or 100 years
ago. The difference now is that as a society, we are now much more
aware of these dangers and more of them are getting caught, and that
awareness itself must actually make it safer than it used to be, not
more dangerous, surely?

That is correct. The number of children killed by strangers is no more
now than fifty years ago (about six a year) while the risk of being
killed by family or close friends is ten times greater. However the
media frenzy for sales means that it has been promoted out of all
proportion to sell papers. I doubt many parents today don't worry about
their children being out whereas my parents never felt concerned when I
was young (I asked them when I was older)

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

squeaker wrote on 01/02/2007 10:42 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I'd introduce global warming (which will be very
relevant to London in the next 20 years or so), along with a brief
mention of exhaust gas pollution, fat kids, vehicle congestion and
noise around schools, etc..

Everybody talks about global warming but as a motivator of behaviour IME
it is very low down on the list.

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

squeaker wrote on 01/02/2007 10:42 +0100:

Quoted message said:

As others have said, one of the main barriers is the 'cycling is
dangerous' mentality (along with the perceived risk from paedophiles /
terrorists / whatever the press have come up with this week) so some
stats, possibly the relevant long term health (obesity) ones, should
feature somewhere?

Quite probably but classic change management theory says telling them it
is not dangerous will not work. What you have to focus on is the
dangers of not cycling rather that making them admit to themselves that
they were wrong about cycling being dangerous.

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Tony Raven said the following on 01/02/2007 11:23:

Quoted message said:

That is correct. The number of children killed by strangers is no more
now than fifty years ago (about six a year) while the risk of being
killed by family or close friends is ten times greater.

So in practise all this increased awareness has actually made bugger-all
difference (to deaths anyway, if not abuse)!

Quoted message said:

I doubt many parents today don't worry about
their children being out whereas my parents never felt concerned when I
was young (I asked them when I was older)

My mother used to kick us out of the house, never mind worry about us!

What a sad society we live in.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

In news:[email hidden],
Tony Raven <[email hidden]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:

Quoted message said:

That is correct. The number of children killed by strangers is no
more now than fifty years ago (about six a year) while the risk of
being killed by family or close friends is ten times greater. However the
media frenzy for sales means that it has been promoted
out of all proportion to sell papers. I doubt many parents today
don't worry about their children being out whereas my parents never
felt concerned when I was young (I asked them when I was older)

Isn't there a wossname out there somewhere which states that children should
be actively encouraged to get a paper round as it exposes them at an early
age to the dangers of:

o cycling, and
o being out in the dark, and
o handling the "Daily Mail"

??

And yes, I tried googling. For it.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn.

Tony Raven <[email hidden]> wrote in news:52e0tdF1odgeuU1
@mid.individual.net:

Quoted message said:

That is correct. The number of children killed by strangers is no more
now than fifty years ago

Agreed. However, it is public perception that we need to address - not the
actual danger. Children cycling in supervised groups would do that and I
suspect the kids would have fun participating.

Walking buses operate within a typical radius of a mile and a half of the
school. I suspect that a "bike bus" could easily double that radius,
bringing eco-friendly, safe, fun journeys to and from school to a much
wider "audience" than can walking buses.

Paul Boyd wrote on 01/02/2007 11:41 +0100:

Quoted message said:

So in practise all this increased awareness has actually made bugger-all
difference (to deaths anyway, if not abuse)!

It hasn't changed in absolute terms but because of the growth in
population over that period the risk has dropped although the perception
of risk has grown massively.

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy