A couple of days ago, we discussed bicyclist fatality statistics in the comments section of this article.
Well, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration just released the findings of a new study, ranking Florida as the most dangerous place in the nation to be a cyclist. Florida led the nation in bicycle fatalities, with 119 deaths in 2007, followed by California with 109, New York with 51, Texas with 48 and Louisiana with 22.
Statistically, the safest places to be a cyclist are the Dakotas, Wyoming, Vermont and Delaware — none of those five states reported a single fatality during the study period. Any of you Florida folks want to head for safer territory?
This study was covered by The Tampa Tribune, among others. Check out the complete article (including lots of blatantly anti-cyclist comments by Tribune readers) by clicking here.
And, click here to read the entire study summary.
Food for thought…
Popularity: 10% [?]
California is the most populous state in the nation, so it’s 2nd place rank isn’t that surprising. More relevant, obviously, would be statistics of % of cyclists killed, or at least these numbers in perspective of state population.
I agree. Giving just the total number of deaths lacks and context. How many were drunk? Had heart attacks? Health related deaths? Road off cliffs mountain biking? etc. etc.
109 deaths out of 367,757 cyclists, so 0.0003 precent of cyclists died. (based on 1% of Californians being cyclists) Or 119 out of 183, 283 so 0.0006 percent of cyclists died (again assuming 1% of Floridians are cyclists) I’m not too worried. (I’m also sure that someone better with statistics and with enough time can come up with much better numbers and analysis)
The clearing house for bicyclist statistics is the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center:
http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/index.cfm
Alcohol-related crashes are “broken out” in the above study, but not other crash types or causes…problem is that there is no uniform reporting tool — law enforcement agencies often have little to no idea what happened in a crash unless there were witnesses or some other clear cause. There have been studies that enumerate various crash types (overtaking collisions, “right hooks”, unlit cyclists, etc.), but again, these numbers may be questionable due to the original reporting at the time of the incident.
Still, if you eliminate alcohol from the equation, somewhere around a third of these deaths wouldn’t have happened. The total number of cyclist deaths would then shrink considerably.
Look at Table 3, last column. That gives the fatality rate per capita. Florida still ranks worst, but California is 10th on that list. LA, SC, MT, OR, NV, NM, AZ, HI, CA are numbers 2 through 10.
An even better measure would by fatalities per 100,000 miles cycled, but since no one knows how much cycling is going on….
Yup, we got us some morons right here in the Bay area, and it sounds like most of them are cagers who foolishly believe that bikes belong on the sidewalk – just not their sidewalk.
If I said what I truly felt about people like that I’d never be allowed to post here again.
Raiyn, I think I know how you really feel…and I’m right there with you!
Doesn’t the above study just make you proud as hell for living in Florida?
Ridng a bicycle is a lot like flying: It can be tough to have a “minor” accident.
I think I’ll keep riding, though.
@ Ghost
About as much as reading the comments section on TBO. C’mon lottery! Big money, no whammy!
Andy Clarke figured it out – Florida is a warm weather state, so people ride year round.
Hey, wait! Isn’t that pretty much the case for California as well? Come to think of it, it’s true for Texas too.
ANDY, HELP US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey, come on- we all know that 57% of all statistics are just made up.
For bike fatality statistics to make any sense, we’d have to be able to compare total miles ridden state by state, and come up with a comparative “deaths per million miles ridden”, or something like that. Just posting the number of bicycle deaths per state does very little to tell us which states are dangerous- and which states are safe.
For all we know, the states with no bicycle deaths are just so dangerous no one wants to ride there at all.
I’d also like to submit, that it would also be helpful if we knew how the cyclist was riding. Not to blame the victim, but I see many organ donors on wheels, riding the wrong way on a one way street with no lights at night on the sidewalk, etc,.
I think a great many types of accidents can be avoided with good education on part of motorists AND cyclists.
Yes, Russ, that would be helpful, but again it’s the lack of a uniform reporting tool — the process depends on both credible witnesses and law enforcement folks who care enough to investigate such things thoroughly…that doesn’t seem to be happening in a lot of bike/car fatality cases.
Anecdotally, it stands to reason that many (most?) of the fatalities were poorly lit, drunk, violating the right-of-way, blowing through a stoplight, etc. Eliminate these variables from the equation and things start to look pretty darn safe out there!
I can maybe help Russ a little bit here. Where I work does compile accident statistics, and I’ve been told (since I asked them), that the cyclist was generally at fault about 50% of the time. So it’s kind of a wash, at least around here.
And honestly, I thought that percentage would be higher.
Much higher.
Not to split hairs here, but I’d like to know how many of these were cyclists as opposed to <Guys on Bikes. If we eliminated ‘salmon”, “bike ninjas” and the drunks what kind of numbers would we be talking about?
Raiyn, that’s what I’m getting at — my comment about “anecdotal” evidence comes from the incidents reported in the Tampa Tribune and St. Pete Times…the overwhelming majority of bike fatalities in this area are reported as someone riding in the middle of the night, unlit, against traffic and/or drunk/high on crack, etc. Mostly “guys on bikes” rather than cyclists, at least based on what the news is telling me.