HISTORIAL DATA AND ENFORCEMENT STATS
 

CHP HISTORICAL AND CURRENT STATISTICS: 1996 – 2006

In comparing the past eight years worth of equipment theft and recoveries, sharp theft increases can be seen starting in 2001. The following statistics were shared with the CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM (CPP) of Southern California by the California Highway Patrol.
 
YEAR STOLEN RECOVERED % RECOVERED % NOT RECOVERED
1996 412 121 30% 70%
1997 404 125 31% 69%
1998 468 173 37% 63%
1999 473 140 30% 70%
2000 472 132 28% 72%
2001 695 213 31% 72%
2002 793 269 34% 66%
2003 922 359 39% 61%
2004 1159 423 37% 63%
2005 1186 483 31% 59%
2006 1024 415 41% 59%
2007 752 342 46% 54%
 
LAW ENFORCEMENT STATISTICS


Several Members on Our Board of Directors Are Law Enforcement Officers involved in the investigation of construction equipment thefts

We Make Sure The theft Gets Into California’s Computerized Theft System Completely And accurately.

We Prepare Stolen/Reward and recovered Bulletins And Send them To over 175 Law Enforcement Agencies Throughout California And Neighboring States.

Recovery Rate of Our Members’ Marked Stolen Equipment Is between 70% AND 75%.

California’s Recovery Rate Was 41% in 2006.

National Recovery Rate was between 10 and 15% in 2006.

OUR SEMI-ANNUAL TRAINING FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IS A BENEFIT TO THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY.
   
     
   
CHP STATEWIDE STOLENS & RECOVERIES THROUGH 2007

The following chart shows current statistics from a statewide perspective, within CHP divisional areas.
   
CHP DIVISIONS (Local Areas in bold) STOLEN RECOVERED % RECOVERED % NOT RECOVERED
Southern 160 48 30% 70%
Border 159 40 25% 75%
Coastal 50 8 16% 84%
Inland 163 77 47% 53%
Southern CA 503 125 35% 65%
         
STATEWIDE TOTAL 554 204 36% 64%
 
Southern CA 64% 61%    
   
TOP FIVE STOLEN EQUIPMENT BRANDS STATEWIDE IN 2006

1. Melroe / Ingersoll-Rand
2. Caterpillar
3. COEQ – Unpublished
4. John Deere
5. Case

COEQ - Unpublished Construction Equipment. If no make or model was indicated in the official stolen report, if incomplete product information was provided to officers, or if the described machine is unknown or unfamiliar to officers the loss will usually fall into this general category. Recovery chances are cut significantly for such poorly identified machines.