 |
October 30, 2007
Cultivating Safety on Farms and RanchesFarm Safety
 Who's more likely to die on the job, a firefighter or a farmer?
You're a savvy bunch, so I'm sure you correctly chose the farmer. But agriculture actually had the dubious distinction of claiming two of the top ten most dangerous jobs in America for 2006. Farmers and ranchers ranked sixth, with 37.1 fatalities per 100,000 workers, and general agricultural workers ranked tenth, with 21.7 fatalities per 100,000. [This according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (PDF | 123 KB)]
Compare those numbers to the overall average of worker deaths on the job of 3.9 per 100,000. Agriculture is anywhere from 5.5 to 9.5 times more dangerous.
See for yourself.
Browse the results of a Google News search for the phrase "farm accident." At the time of this writing, that search yielded 39 hits from the last month alone. Even allowing for some duplication and false hits in the results, that's still a stunning rate of deaths and accidents happening on farms every day. And though the numbers will likely be different at the time you follow that link, they won't be different enough.
We're losing almost 600 people a year -- both adults and children -- to the hazards of farming, including heavy machinery, harmful chemicals, and extreme weather. Add to that the National Safety Council's estimate that agriculture contributes to another 90,000 disabling injuries, and you'll understand the need to promote farm safety and health programs.
So take a look at some of the following resources from the Library's Education and Outreach pages and other places across the Web, and spread the word about farm safety. As is often said, safety is no accident.
Posted by Mary Ann Leonard
Added to Farm Safety on October 30, 2007
EST | Permalink
Lively discussions and different opinions are encouraged within the bounds of respectful civil discourse. Questionable language, personal attacks, off-topic comments, and gratuitous links will either be edited or deleted. Comments are moderated and will not appear on InfoFarm until they have been approved.
The Rural Information Center also has an Agricultural Safety Web page under the Rural Health section.
|
Submitted by: RIC on November 8, 2007 02:23 PM
|
|
Hey, thanks, RIC. Sorry I missed it, but I'm glad you chimed in. Looks like a great page you've got there. |
Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 8, 2007 03:09 PM
|
|
Mary Ann - I checked the BLS reference, but could not find the fatality rate per 100,000 workers for firefighters. In the BLS reference I did find the number of firefighter fatalities but not the fatality rate. The chart in the BLS reference that has the farming fatality rates does not include firefighter fatality rate. So, I do not see the basis for the comaprison betwen firefighters and farmers. |
Submitted by: Tom on November 16, 2007 05:51 PM
|
|
Tom,
The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that there are 283,630 fire fighters in the United States.
The Bureau also indicates, as you saw, that fire fighter fatalities rose to 42 in 2006.
Given those figures, I calculated the fatality rate for fire fighters to be 14.8. (Divide 42 by 283,630; multiply the result by 100,000 to get the rate per 100,000.) That number falls well below the figures provided for farmers and other agricultural workers (37.1 and 21.7, respectively).
Of course, like all statistics, there are many ways to look at things, and even the original counting or methodology might be different. Here are two examples related to fire fighter fatalities:
In stark contrast to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the National Fire Protection Association offers a much higher figure for on-duty fire fighter deaths in 2006 -- 89, more than double the 42 from the BLS. But then the NFPA also estimates many more fire fighters in the field: 1,136,650 total (313,300 career fire fighters; 823,350 volunteer fire fighters). [Note: Different years covered in those two reports, but for the sake of this discussion, close enough.]
With numbers that far apart, it's obvious the two organizations are counting fire fighters and fatalities very differently.
Another researcher (and former fire fighter) looked at fatality rates based on actual time "at risk," rather than just on the job. His results showed a much higher risk factor for fire fighters because he used a different process for normalizing the numbers.
Which is correct? I'm not qualified to say. That's why I left things in the number-crunching hands of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. |
Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 19, 2007 11:27 AM
|
|
This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
|
