The American Motorcyclist Association recently, quietly released an official endorsement of lane splitting. A summary of the position statement reads: “Given the ongoing success of lane splitting in California and the recent enthusiasm for lane splitting and/or filtering in other states, the AMA endorses these practices and will assist groups and individuals working to bring legal lane splitting and/or filtering to their states.”
From our perspective, this is a huge leap forward in progressing the pro-lane splitting position outside of California. We recently reported on the state of lane splitting in our Truth About Lane Splitting story in early October. The article explores the lack of empirical data supporting the safety of lane splitting, making the AMA’s endorsement of the act even more surprising.
Of note in the position statement is the AMA’s reminder to motorcyclists opposed to lane splitting: “Motorcyclists who oppose lane splitting should remember that it is optional in California. Permitting lane splitting is not the same as requiring it, so those opposed to the practice should consider the desires of other motorcyclists who believe they would benefit from it. Lane splitting is an issue of choice.”
Read the entire AMA position statement below.
The American Motorcyclist Association places significant emphasis on motorcyclei operator and passenger safety. On every type of public roadway, motorcyclists encounter challenges from other roadway users and are constantly vigilant to unsafe conditions around them.
Perhaps one of the most dangerous situations for any on-highway motorcyclist is being caught in congested traffic, where stop-and-go vehicles, distracted and inattentive vehicle operators, and environmental conditions pose an increased risk of physical contact with another vehicle or hazard. Even minor contact under such conditions can be disastrous for motorcyclists.
The Hurt Report1, the most comprehensive motorcycle crash causation study to date, noted that, “Moderate or heavy traffic was the situation at 59.2% of the accidents [studied].” Reducing a motorcyclist’s exposure to vehicles that are frequently accelerating and decelerating on congested roadways can be one way to reduce front- and rear-end collisions for those most vulnerable in traffic.
In many countries (excluding the United States), lane splittingii and filteringiii are normal practices for motorcyclists. Particularly in the highly urbanized areas of Europe and Asia, motorcycle and scooter operators are expected to pass between conventional vehicles and filter (advance) to the front of the group.
Recent events in the U.S. have renewed motorcyclists’ interest in lane splitting. Therefore, the AMA has prepared this position statement to aid in understanding this issue and assist motorcyclists in deciding whether to support efforts to permit lane splitting in their state.
One of the recommendations in the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety (NAMS)2 is: “Study the safety implications of lane splitting.” In support of this recommendation, the report states:
“A motorcycle’s narrow width can allow it to pass between lanes of stopped or slow-moving cars on roadways where the lanes are wide enough to offer an adequate gap. This option can provide an escape route for motorcyclists who would otherwise be trapped or struck from behind. There is evidence (Hurt, 1981) that traveling between lanes of stopped or slow-moving cars (i.e., lane splitting) on multiple-lane roads (such as interstate highways) slightly reduces crash frequency compared with staying within the lane and moving with other traffic.“Although lane splitting is allowed in just a few areas of the United States, notably California, it appears to be worthy of further study because it offers a means of reducing congestion in addition to possible safety benefits. It is widely used in many other countries.”
In a statement issued by the Motorcycle Industry Council in 20113, the trade group states: “In full consideration of the risks and benefits of lane splitting, the Motorcycle Industry Council supports state laws that allow lane splitting under reasonable restrictions.”
For decades, California has been the only state to permit lane splitting. While not specifically permitted or prohibited in the California Vehicle Code, lane splitting authority comes from the California Highway Patrol. In the Frequently Asked Questions section of their website at http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/answers.html#03, the following question-and-answer is provided:
Can motorcycle riders “split” lanes and ride between other vehicles?
Lane splitting by motorcycles is permissible but must be done in a safe and prudent manner.
In early 2013, the CHP published lane splitting guidelines4 for the first time. While the guidelines do not carry the force of law, they provide clear indicators under which a motorcyclist might be cited for unsafe or imprudent behavior.
Legislatively, there has been state-level activity on lane splitting, although to date no bill has been enacted5.
Passing legislation to permit lane splitting may be the easiest part of the process. Significant effort would subsequently be required to educate the law enforcement community, officials and administrators within state departments of transportation and public safety, prosecutors, the judiciary and the general motoring public on the benefits to those groups and motorcyclists to make lane splitting safe for everyone. Using public service announcements and campaigns, traditional broadcast and print media, social media, and other forms of information sharing could assist in highlighting the safety, congestion reduction, and other benefits of lane splitting.
Taking into consideration that the vast majority of the motoring public does not ride motorcycles, we are certain non-motorcyclists do not understand the risks and the benefits of lane splitting to the riding community. Motorists in California being the exception, we believe it would take many years of experience and substantial and ongoing public information campaigns to educate non-motorcyclists to accept motorcyclists passing them between lanes of traffic.
The AMA endorses rider responsibility and actions that make roadways safer for motorcyclists. While research and evidence suggest that lane splitting may reduce a motorcyclist’s risk exposure somewhat, we are cautious to issue a blanket endorsement supporting the practice. In particular, experience has taught us that the legislative process and the implementation of new laws are fraught with uncertainty. A straightforward lane splitting bill may easily be amended with provisions that the AMA and the motorcycling community would find unacceptable. Provisions such as mandatory helmet use in an adult-choice state or mandatory minimum medical insurance coverage provisions would quickly poison an otherwise well-intentioned effort.
Motorcyclists who oppose lane splitting should remember that it is optional in California. Permitting lane splitting is not the same as requiring it, so those opposed to the practice should consider the desires of other motorcyclists who believe they would benefit from it. Lane splitting is an issue of choice.
Even with the best intentions and organization, inappropriate behavior by motorcyclists can quickly garner a large negative response from the motoring public. With the easy availability of video systems and the Internet, a few postings of public roadway stunting, such as speeding past motorists stuck in traffic, could sour a legitimate campaign to approve lane splitting in a state. While the AMA has long advocated responsible riding practices and does not condone any behavior that violates the rules of the road, we caution that the future of lane splitting in any state could be derailed by the actions of a few irresponsible motorcyclists. Advocates of lane splitting should be prepared to counter any negative responses they receive from legislators and those responsible for implementing lane splitting laws.
Given the ongoing success of lane splitting in California and the recent enthusiasm for lane splitting and/or filtering in other states, the AMA endorses these practices and will assist groups and individuals working to bring legal lane splitting and/or filtering to their states.
1Hurt, H.H. Jr., Ouellet, J.V. & Thom D.R. (1981b). Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures. (DOT HS 805 862). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, page 57.
2National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety, U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (DOT HS 809 156), 2000, page 51.
3“Position on Lane Splitting,” <http://www.mic.org/downloads/MIC-Position-on-Lane-Splitting-12-12-11.pdf>, Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC), December 12, 2011.
4“Lane Splitting General Guidelines,” <http://www.chp.ca.gov/programs/pdf/lanesplitting_guidelines.pdf>, California Highway Patrol, California Motorcycle Safety Program.
5California 2013 SB-350 would codify lane splitting but would also impose certain restrictions on motorcyclists. Other states that have recently considered lane-splitting legislation include: Arizona (2010 HB-2475); Illinois (2006 SB-2439); Massachusetts (2007 HB-3493); Nevada (2013 AB-236); New Jersey (2012 AB-2102 and 2010 AB-140 and AB-1684); Oregon (2011 SB-463 and 2007 SB-386); Texas (2011 HB-1571 and 2009 SB-506); and Washington (2007 HB-2160 and SB-5985).
i“Motorcycle,” as used throughout this position statement, refers to a two-wheeled, single-track registered motor vehicle that requires a motorcycle license or an operator’s license with motorcycle endorsement to operate legally on public roadways. Motorized bicycles, mopeds, motorcycles equipped with a sidecar, three-wheeled motorcycles, motorcycles pulling a trailer, and other non-standard configurations are excluded from this definition.
ii“Lane splitting” refers to the practice of riding a motorcycle between clearly marked lanes for traffic traveling in the same direction.
iii“Filtering” refers to the practice of riding a motorcycle between stopped motor vehicles to the front of the pack, typically at a signalized intersection.