Injury Rate Comparisons for Nonmechanized and Mechanized Logging Operations, Washington State, 2005-2014

Current industry classification systems in the United States do not differentiate mechanized and nonmechanized logging operations. The objectives of this article are to quantify injury risk differences between mechanized and nonmechanized logging operations in Washington State and to evaluate for potential injury risk tradeoffs, such as decreasing traumatic injuries while increasing nontraumatic injuries that might occur when mechanized logging operations are substituted for nonmechanized logging operations.

Using Washington State workers' compensation insurance risk classes to differentiate mechanized and nonmechanized logging operations, injury and illness claims data and employer reported hours were used to compare claim rates and to characterize injuries by type of logging operation.

From 2005 to 2014, the accepted Washington State worker's compensation claim rate for nonmechanized logging was 46.4 per 100 full-time equivalent employees compared to 6.7 per 100 full-time equivalent (FTE) for mechanized logging activities. The rate ratio for comparing nonmechanized to mechanized logging claims rates for all accepted claims was 6.9 (95% Confidence Interval 6.4-7.5). Claim rates for traumatic injury and nontraumatic injuries in nonmechanized logging exceeded comparable rates in mechanized logging activities, although the distribution of types of injury differed by type of logging operation. A greater percentage of accepted claims in nonmechanized logging were traumatic injuries than in mechanized logging (92.2% vs. 85.0%, respectively). In addition, nonmechanized logging had higher total claim and medical costs per FTE and had a higher proportion of claims with lost work time than mechanized logging.

Mechanized logging offers a considerable safety advantage over nonmechanized logging operations. Continued efforts to increase the mechanization of logging operations will result in decreased injury rates.