Oregon lawmakers have advanced a bill to boost funding for wildlife conservation efforts and help protect the state’s most imperiled species.
House Bill 4134, also known as the 1.25 Percent for Wildlife bill, would increase the state’s lodging tax to 2.75 percent, directing most of the additional revenue to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) for wildlife conservation programs. Oregon’s lodging tax, currently 1.5 percent, is calculated against the rates charged by a hotel, AirBnB, or other short-term lodging site.
The bill received bipartisan support from Oregon House members Tuesday. Three Republicans, Representatives Bobby Levy (R-Echo), Mark Owens (R-Crane), and Greg Smith (R-Heppner), joined most Democrats to pass the bill. Democrat Representatives Daniel Nguyễn (D-Lake Oswego), Shannon Jones Isadore (D-Portland), and John Lively (D-Springfield) voted against it. The bill will now be taken up by the state Senate.
Lawmakers and advocates have worked for years to find a solution for the ODFW’s funding woes, which particularly impact its ability to carry out conservation work to protect non-game animals. The state agency is primarily funded through revenue from fishing and hunting licenses and a federal excise tax on firearms, ammunition, and fishing gear.
Wildlife advocates say ODFW’s current funding strategy has incentivized the agency to focus on game species conservation, even as hundreds of other native animal species—from amphibians to marine mammals to birds—are threatened due to issues including habitat loss, invasive species, and the increasingly dire effects of climate change. Marine animals like humpback whales and sea turtles are also at risk due to conflicts with commercial fishing and crabbing, which ODFW oversees.
State legislators brought forward a similar version of the bill during last year’s legislative session, but it failed to cross the finish line after two Republican senators used procedural tactics to stall it during the last week of the 2025 session.
HB 4134 is notable for its broad base of support. Not only is it backed by legislators across the political spectrum, but it’s also been commended by an unlikely coalition of advocacy groups. The Oregon Hunters Association and Oregon Cattlemen’s Association are both in favor of the bill, as are wildlife conservation groups including the Bird Alliance of Oregon, Humane Voters Oregon, Western Environmental Law Center, and Willamette Riverkeeper.
If passed, HB 4134 is expected to generate about $37 million annually. Most of the new funding would be dedicated to implementing ODFW’s State Wildlife Action Plan, which identifies at-risk wildlife populations in Oregon, and outlines protection strategies. Proceeds would also go toward wildfire prevention, anti-poaching measures, and compensating livestock producers for wolf-related losses.
While the bill received overwhelmingly positive testimony from Oregonians across the state, it found some detractors from business owners and business advocates, especially in the tourism industry. Opponents say the tax increase would be detrimental to the state’s economy, discouraging people from traveling to or around Oregon.
Supporters argue the impact of a small bump to Oregon’s lodging tax—currently the lowest state lodging tax in the nation—would be negligible. Besides, they say, more funding is necessary—not just to help vulnerable species across the state, but also to protect Oregon’s wildlife, which is a key driver of tourism to the state.
Rep. Ken Helm (D-Beaverton), HB 4134’s lead sponsor who has spent the last decade trying to address ODFW’s budget concerns, said it would be a mistake not to pass the bill.
“The opportunity [to pass a similar bill] will not come again soon, if ever, and it will likely not come in this form, where you have Republicans and Democrats that have come together to create a very good bill that’s very precise and does what it says it’s going to do,” Helm said ahead of Tuesday’s vote. “Don’t tell yourself, ‘Oh, we’ll get to it next session.’ Don’t tell yourself that we’re somehow going to solve this problem with the general fund someday. That’s a fantasy. I’ve lived it.”
Action needed to protect wildlife
Oregon teems with diverse natural beauty and wildlife, from the frogs and newts residing in western Oregon’s forests, to the bighorn sheep in the Wallowa Mountains, to the seals and whales that can be spotted along the coast. But those animals, along with many other species, are struggling.
In its most recent assessment, ODFW identified more than 300 species of “greatest conservation need.” The list includes amphibians, birds (including multiple owl species), reptiles, fish, and mammals.
ODFW’s State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) identifies ways to help the imperiled wildlife through habitat and ecosystem restoration, among other measures. But Oregon has historically lacked stable funding for such programs, especially when it comes to protecting non-game animals.
Jim Greer, a former ODFW employee who served as the agency’s director in the late 1990s, said the bill “may be the last life-line for the hundreds of fish and wildlife species in Oregon currently in decline or needing help to secure adequate habitat to sustain populations into the future.”
Greer said the ODFW’s conservation plan has been “held up as one of the best plans in the country, and a standard that other states looked to as a model.”
“The SWAP addresses the needs of the myriad of species that are not hunted or fished, but [the plan] has never had adequate or consistent funding,” Greer wrote in public testimony to the Oregon Legislature. ““HB 4134 eliminates the fight for limited general fund or lottery dollars, rectifies past funding shortfalls and now has bipartisan support to finally address and turn the corner on long-term funding needs of hundreds of declining wildlife species.”
Cattlemen and conservationists unite
A key reason that HB 4134 has found success so far is due to support from rural Oregonians whose livelihoods rely on state wildlife management programs. The Oregon Cattlemen’s Association has been one of the most outspoken groups in support of the bill, sending representatives to the Capitol for the House vote earlier this week.
The Cattlemen’s Association has been particularly enthusiastic about the bill’s dedicated funding—about $3 million per biennium—for the state’s wolf management and compensation program.
Wolves were reintroduced to the American west in the 1990s, starting in Yellowstone National Park, and their presence has had positive effects on the ecosystem. But they pose a threat to livestock, and with ranchers forbidden from killing the animals before they can get to their cattle, the state came up with a plan to pay livestock ranchers for their losses. Still, ranchers have called on the state to cough up more money for wolf mitigation and compensation.
Oregon Cattlemen’s Association President Diana Wirth said ranching communities “value healthy ecosystems,” but “the costs of living with wolves fall disproportionately on the families and operations most directly affected.”
“When livestock, horses, or working dogs are lost to wolf depredation, the impacts extend far beyond market value, [creating] financial strain, operational disruption, and ongoing uncertainty for producers already operating on thin margins,” Wirth testified.
A dedicated source of funding for the wolf compensation program could limit conflict between wildlife conservationists and ranchers, who have fought over limited resources in the past. The support from livestock ranchers has convinced some Republican lawmakers, who are typically opposed to tax increases of any kind, to support the bill.
The lodging tax
Lawmakers and advocates supportive of the bill say they turned to Oregon’s Transient Lodging Tax (TLT) as a solution following previous attempts to increase funding for ODFW through the state’s general fund have failed.
Oregon’s statewide lodging tax is currently 1.5 percent, making it the lowest in the country among states among the 48 states that collect statewide lodging taxes. Colorado employs the second-lowest rate, at 2.9 percent, meaning Oregon’s lodging tax would remain the lowest even with the 1.25 percent bump.
However, many jurisdictions across Oregon supplement the state lodging tax with additional taxes on short-term rentals. Portland imposes two lodging taxes at the city level: A 6 percent occupancy tax and a 3 percent Tourism Improvement District fee. Multnomah County also imposes a 5.5 percent lodging tax. When combined with the state charge, this adds up to a 16 percent tax on all hotel stays in Portland. The local taxes support Travel Portland and other programs to promote tourism. Proceeds are also directed toward supporting Portland’s cultural amenities, and a portion is directed into the city’s general fund.
HB 4134 opponents say an additional increase to the state’s lodging tax would be detrimental to Oregon’s tourism industry. Portland Metro Chamber President Andrew Hoan claimed the bill is “the exact opposite of what we should be doing in this moment.”
“Instead of making it easier for people to come to Portland from around the state or country, we are raising the ticket price,” Hoan testified in a letter to the Legislature. “This would deal a major economic blow to an already declining private sector.”
With an additional state lodging tax of 1.25 percent, the tax imposed on Portland hotel stays would total 17.25 percent. For a $300 hotel room, this would result in an additional charge of $3.75 compared to current rates.
Rep. Mark Gamba (D-Milwaukie), who voted in support of HB 4134, was dubious of claims that such a tax increase would impact tourism.
“I have never once looked to see what the bed tax was to make a decision on where to [travel],” Gamba said ahead of the House vote.
Gamba also pointed out that, unlike most jurisdictions with comparable lodging tax rates, Oregon doesn’t have a sales tax. In Seattle, for instance, the citywide hotel tax is 15.7 percent, with an additional 2.3 percent imposed on large hotels downtown. Those visiting Seattle will also pay a 10.25 percent sales tax on purchases at restaurants and shops. Even so, tourism to Seattle has been on the rise in recent years.
Rep. Helm said the lodging tax is unique, and the small proposed increase “is not going to bust anyone’s budget.”
Greer, the former ODFW director, said those opposed to the bill should consider the stakes.
“The tradeoff between paying an extra $3.75 for a $300 room and seeing many of Oregon’s species become listed as threatened or endangered or even worse, going extinct, would be self-serving for the few, at the expense of the many,” Greer wrote.
Proponents say the bill is designed to protect Oregon’s nature and wildlife, which drives tourism to and within the state. More than 100 Oregon businesses, including several outdoor gear stores, fishing guides, food and drink establishments, and hotels, signed on to a letter supporting the bill, calling it a “reinvestment in the reason so many visitors travel to Oregon.”
A Senate hearing on HB 4134 is set for 5 pm Thursday, February 26. So far, nearly all the written testimony submitted to the Senate has been supportive.
