Opens in a new tab
needsahuman.
Search ⌘KGet the data

Will AI replace forest, conservation, and logging workers?

4 jobs scored. On average 94% of the task time in these jobs still needs a person, and the family averages 84 out of 100 on Still needs a human, where higher is safer.

84
Average Still needs a human score, 0 to 100 ↑ safer. Will AI replace them? Nah.
4
Jobs scored in this family
94%
Average share of that still needs a person
33k
US workers in these jobs

How the work could shift in Forest, Conservation, and Logging Workers

The share of US workers in these jobs whose job would sit in each band, from today to 2060.

Today
100%
of US workers in this family are in jobs that mostly need a person (our top band, Nah.)
0% are in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)
By 2045
10%
of US workers in this family would still be in jobs that mostly need a person (our top band, Nah.)
20% would be in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)
By 2060
10%
of US workers in this family would still be in jobs that mostly need a person (our top band, Nah.)
79% would be in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)

Each job's score moves towards the bottom band (Largely: AI could largely do the job) by the year it could be largely automated, slowly at first and faster later, as adoption usually goes. Each job is run as ten scenarios across its replacement range, so every figure mixes early and late outcomes. The model stops at 2060. How the timeline works

Share of US workers in this family in each verdict band, today to 20600%25%50%75%100%2026: 100.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)100%Today2030: 65.5% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)66%2030: 34.5% of US workers in this family in jobs where AI could do a little of the work (A little.)35%20302035: 10.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)10%2035: 71.8% of US workers in this family in jobs where AI could do a little of the work (A little.)72%2035: 18.2% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could partly do (Partly.)18%20352040: 10.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)10%2040: 24.6% of US workers in this family in jobs where AI could do a little of the work (A little.)25%2040: 45.4% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could partly do (Partly.)45%2040: 20.0% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could mostly do (Mostly.)20%20402045: 10.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)10%2045: 40.9% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could partly do (Partly.)41%2045: 29.1% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could mostly do (Mostly.)29%2045: 20.0% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)20%20452050: 10.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)10%2050: 10.9% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could partly do (Partly.)11%2050: 39.1% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could mostly do (Mostly.)39%2050: 40.0% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)40%20502055: 10.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)10%2055: 30.9% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could mostly do (Mostly.)31%2055: 59.1% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)59%20552060: 10.0% of US workers in this family in jobs that mostly need a person (Nah.)10%2060: 10.9% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could mostly do (Mostly.)11%2060: 79.1% of US workers in this family in jobs AI could largely do (Largely.)79%2060
Will AI replace the job?Largely.Mostly.Partly.A little.Nah.
Share of US workers in this family whose job would sit in each band, year by year. Updated with every release.
Show the data
YearLargelyMostlyPartlyA littleNah
Today (2026)0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%100.0%
20300.0%0.0%0.0%34.5%65.5%
20350.0%0.0%18.2%71.8%10.0%
20400.0%20.0%45.4%24.6%10.0%
204520.0%29.1%40.9%0.0%10.0%
205040.0%39.1%10.9%0.0%10.0%
205559.1%30.9%0.0%0.0%10.0%
206079.1%10.9%0.0%0.0%10.0%

Every job in Forest, Conservation, and Logging Workers, ranked

How to read a row: the number is the Still needs a human score, out of 100, higher is safer; “AI replace?” is our answer to “Will AI replace this job?”; the bar is the task split: white AI does it, grey AI helps, amber needs a human.

Log Graders and ScalersFarming, Fishing, and Forestry · 45-4023
82↑ saferAI replace? Nah.
AI does 0%AI helps 7%Needs a human 93%
20562046–2060+
3k
$46,330
Logging Equipment OperatorsFarming, Fishing, and Forestry · 45-4022
83↑ saferAI replace? Nah.
AI does 0%AI helps 16%Needs a human 84%
20572046–2060+
21k
$49,740
FallersFarming, Fishing, and Forestry · 45-4021
85↑ saferAI replace? Nah.
AI does 0%AI helps 0%Needs a human 100%
20582046–2060+
3k
$52,100
Forest and Conservation WorkersFarming, Fishing, and Forestry · 45-4011
87↑ saferAI replace? Nah.
AI does 0%AI helps 0%Needs a human 100%
20592046–2060+
6k
$43,680