The initial view of The Coalition of Motorcycling Organisations (COMO) as set out on 5 November 2020, was that use of a motorcycle was permitted for the purpose of “essential travel” only: https://www.bmf.co.uk/news/show/englands-national-lockdown-sees-further-revision-to-the-covid-19-riding-guidelines 

“The joint authors of the guidelines, Richard Gladman of IAM RoadSmart and Roger Bibbings of the Vintage Motorcycle Club, have chosen to leave the majority of the guidelines unchanged while emphasising that motorcycling is only permitted for essential travel purposes in England and therefore all group riding in England is prohibited. As the other administrations alter their restrictions, it is important that recreational or group rides are conducted in accordance with local restrictions.” 

However, upon reflection and careful review of the regulations, their view changed on 11 November 2020 to advise that they felt riding for pleasure was in fact permitted: https://www.bmf.co.uk/news/show/recreational-motorcycling-in-england-permitted-under-new-measures

“We have studied both the legislation and the guidance and have concluded that the rules do permit riding for pleasure, alone or with a mate.

You can ride for recreation on public roads so long as you are:

- on your own

- with one person from another household, or

- with the people you live with (your household) or your support bubble”

What is the correct answer? 

What is very clear, is that you can ride your motorcycle to work, if you cannot work from home, you can also ride it to the shops to buy essential goods. But can you simply go for a social ride, whether that be on the tarmac roads, or using byways / BOATS and UCRs? 

One does not have to follow government guidance as that is not law, it is a matter for the individual whether they wish to follow advice or not. The government or your doctor may advise you to avoid drinking alcohol and advise that you exercise for 30 minutes a day, you may choose to follow that advice or ignore it, there is no sanction for not following the advice. However, when it comes to the law, then you MUST comply, whilst ignorance of the law is no defence. 

Here we have rushed through legislation which has yet to be tested through the Courts, so it is very much a matter of interpretation. 

The starting point is Part 2, “Restrictions on movement”

Regulation 5: Restrictions on leaving home

“5.—(1) No person may leave or be outside of the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)—

(a)the circumstances in which a person has a reasonable excuse include where one of the exceptions set out in regulation 6 applies;

(b)the place where a person is living includes the premises where they live together with any garden, yard, passage, stair, garage, outhouse or other appurtenance of such premises.

(3) This regulation does not apply to any person who is homeless.”

The first question is, what amounts to a “reasonable excuse”, for which a non-exhaustive list is provided in regulation 6. It is non-exhaustive, as the wording refers to “which a person has a reasonable excuse include …” so there may be other reasonable excuses which are not set out within regulation 6. 

The relevant wording for the issue of whether it is legal to ride a motorcycle for recreational purposes is within Regulation 6(2)(d) which reads: 

"to visit a public outdoor place for the purposes of open air recreation— ......" 

From the blogs and various website comments on this issue that I have reviewed, I have not seen any focus on the meaning of the word “visit”. 

If going for a ride on a motorcycle falls into the definition of visiting, then it may be permitted. 

Motorcycling is in my view an “open air recreation” and I do not see any counter argument to that. 

Regulation 7(4)(d) in part 3 of the Regulations includes "any highway to which the public has access;" as being "a public outdoor space"

So, on the face of the Regulations it may be arguable that riding for recreation is permitted. 

However, would a police officer agree and if you dispute any fixed penalty notice, would a Court agree that you are visiting a public outdoor space?

A Court will probably look closely at what parliament's intention was and the meaning of "to visit". 

They may compare the regulations to the guidance, which, depending on how one interprets the regulations are contradictory. They could simply say, that going for a ride, is not going "to visit" but to move along a highway or byway and therefore is not permitted. A more concerning issue to me, is the wording "to visit a public outdoor place". Note the reference is only to "a" public place, in that is is not plural. The regulations do not refer to visiting public places, it is apparent that the intention is not to have people out all day visiting various different public places. So, looking at this from a green laning perspective, it is questionable whether the regulations would permit travel to several byways, as opposed to just one. However, it may be possible to argue that riding along several byways in order to reach the furthest byway from your start point, being the one you intend to visit, is permitted, allowing you to then return home using other byways. However, that may be considered to be stretching the natural meaning of the intended exception.

One may look up the definition of "to visit" giving it, its normal English meaning: 

“go or come to see (a person, place, etc) as an act of friendship or ceremony, on business or for a purpose, or from interest.” (Oxford English Dictionary)

This is all new and untested. You could ride to a public outdoor place, go for a walk, then ride back, that would in my view be visiting for the purpose of open air recreation. Does the argument that you are riding to each road or byway for the purpose of open air recreation carry any weight? Possibly. but that may fall foul of the argument that you may only visit a single public outdoor place. It appears to be a grey area and as with all statute law, matters are subject to statutory interpretation of the regulations. Each person needs to make their own informed decision. 

Ask yourself, whether riding for pleasure along various roads or byways falls into the standard meaning of "to visit", or whether riding to the furthest byway from you is what a Court would interpret as you visiting that last byway, before returning home along another or the same route?

Do you normally talk about things like: “I'm going to visit X, Y and Z roads tomorrow", or "today I visited A, B and C byways" or "I'm visiting the M25 next week"? But one does refer to things like “I visited Nomansland Common or Heartwood forest for a walk yesterday", or "I am going to visit Ellenbrook Fields tomorrow for a walk".

If riding along various roads or byways is deemed to fall into the definition of “visit”, or if it is deemed permissible to visit the byway furthest from you, then it may be possible to argue that going for a social ride on a motorcycle falls within the exceptions as a reasonable excuse. If it does not, fall into the term “visit” then, I’m afraid, it is not permitted. But there is nothing wrong with riding to a relatively local public outdoor place and then going for walk or for some other open air recreation, and then riding back. 

I personally will not be riding either of my motorcycles unless it is for essential travel or to visit a public outdoor place for the purpose of open air recreation. 

But if you are out for the purpose of open air recreation, you must be either alone, or with

one or more members of your household, or your linked household, or with one other person who is not a member of your household or your linked household. So unless you are riding with family members, there can only be two of you in your group.