Skip to content

An independent salary reference. Not affiliated with BLS or any U.S. government agency.

Salary data from BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics

Foresters Salary: New Mexico vs Alaska

Foresters earn a median of $63,860 in New Mexico and $85,550 in Alaska. That is a nominal gap of $21,690 (-25.4%), with Alaska paying more before any cost-of-living adjustment.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, May 2024 estimates. Cost-of-living adjustment uses BEA Regional Price Parities, most recent release.

$63,860
New Mexico median
$69,253 after COL
$85,550
Alaska median
$83,578 after COL
-25.4%
Nominal gap
Alaska leads
-17.1%
Adjusted gap
Alaska leads after COL

The story behind the numbers

On raw wages, Alaska pays $21,690 more per year than New Mexico for foresters, a gap of +25.4%.

After adjusting for cost of living, Alaska still comes out ahead, with roughly $14,325 of extra purchasing power (+17.1% real gap). Local prices do not reverse the nominal advantage.

Full breakdown by location

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

Foresters

New Mexico

Median salary
$63,860
Mean salary
$69,100
Employment
50
Location quotient
0.85
Jobs per 1,000
0.1
COL-adjusted median
$69,253
Regional Price Parity
92.2%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Foresters page for New Mexico →

Foresters

Alaska

Median salary
$85,550
Mean salary
$83,480
Employment
80
Location quotient
4.22
Jobs per 1,000
0.3
COL-adjusted median
$83,578
Regional Price Parity
102.4%

Exact state RPP match.

Full Foresters page for Alaska →

Related pages

Keep digging into foresters 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.