Skip to content
uswages .org

Forest And Conservation Workers Salary: Oregon vs Ohio

Forest And Conservation Workers earn a median of $46,010 in Oregon and $48,470 in Ohio. That is a nominal gap of $2,460 (-5.1%), with Ohio paying more before any cost-of-living adjustment.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, May 2025 estimates. Cost-of-living adjustment uses BEA Regional Price Parities, most recent release.

$46,010
Oregon median
$44,514 after COL
$48,470
Ohio median
$52,245 after COL
-5.1%
Nominal gap
Ohio leads
-14.8%
Adjusted gap
Ohio leads after COL

The story behind the numbers

On raw wages, Ohio pays $2,460 more per year than Oregon for forest and conservation workers, a gap of +5.1%.

After adjusting for cost of living, Ohio still comes out ahead, with roughly $7,731 of extra purchasing power (+14.8% real gap). Local prices do not reverse the nominal advantage.

Full breakdown by location

Detailed wage, employment, and cost-of-living figures for forest and conservation workers in each location. Click through to the full local salary page for percentiles, outlook, and peer areas.

Forest And Conservation Workers

Oregon

Median salary
$46,010
Mean salary
$49,570
Employment
70
Location quotient
0.97
Jobs per 1,000
0.0
COL-adjusted median
$44,514
Regional Price Parity
103.4%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Forest And Conservation Workers page for Oregon →

Forest And Conservation Workers

Ohio

Median salary
$48,470
Mean salary
$49,270
Employment
160
Location quotient
0.73
Jobs per 1,000
0.0
COL-adjusted median
$52,245
Regional Price Parity
92.8%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Forest And Conservation Workers page for Ohio →

Related pages

Keep digging into forest and conservation workers from a different angle.

Common questions about this comparison

What does the cost-of-living adjustment actually do? +

It divides each location's nominal median wage by its Regional Price Parity (RPP), which measures how local prices compare to the national average (100 = national). A wage of $100,000 in an area with RPP 120 has the same purchasing power as roughly $83,000 nationally.

Why would the nominal and adjusted winners disagree? +

High-cost metros often pay higher salaries, but not by enough to fully offset the higher cost of housing, goods, and services. When that happens, the location with the lower nominal wage actually offers more real purchasing power.

What is a location quotient? +

The location quotient measures how concentrated an occupation is in a given area versus the national average. A value of 2.0 means the occupation is twice as common there as nationally. It is a signal of what a state specializes in.