Av8boy said it first, but it has been proven somewhere that for a given duty period (without rest), a crew which flies four of five legs, never mind the many thousands of pilots who daily fly seven or more each day, all face a much greater risk of mishap than for a long-haul crew which must struggle through one approach. But this contrast is not intended to understate the fatigue and disrupted circadian rhythms often faced by long-haul crews.
The short-haul, two-pilot crew might be familiar with many of the cities they operate into, however, that does not minimize the risks faced when climbing/descending with multiple clearances (many are blocked or the call-sign is slurred by the controller, who often is quite saturated by VHF/UHF traffic and various frequencies?) and approaches, whether ILS or so-called "non-prec.", near thunderstorms or in icing conditions. Never mind all of this, which combine with aircraft systems' problems and worsening runway conditions to demand 100% of our concentration.
Incidentally, how much more is each passenger or hull insured, pro-rated for the number of passengers or aircraft type, regarding short versus long-haul?
As for off-duty risks (besides driving in crazy traffic), while cutting down tall weeds today in a field between two popular jogging trails at the Wolf River, I was about four feet from stepping on a long copperhead snake (which was moving away from my machete when I saw it-luckily my running shoes, although they would have offered little protection and were moving too slowly to alert the snake to any vibrations, were not fast enough to step on it...). Maybe this was an indirect result from having decent vacation credit time in our contract? Boots should be worn when blazing any trail!
