Oregon’s New Lodging Tax Proposal: A Balancing Act for Wildlife Conservation and Tourism

Oregon lawmakers are considering a significant increase in the state tax on lodging, camping, and Airbnb stays, aiming to raise an additional 1% for wildlife conservation efforts. This proposal, which could generate up to $30 million annually, highlights the ongoing struggle to adequately fund species conservation programs at the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). With widespread support from hunting, fishing, and conservation groups who argue that the state has historically underfunded these programs, the proposal has also attracted substantial opposition from local tourism and restaurant associations concerned about potential impacts on visitor numbers and business viability. House Bill 2977, sponsored by state Rep. Ken Helm and state Sen. Chris Gorsek, has advanced through committee stages and awaits a public hearing in the House Revenue Committee. The current lodging tax stands at 1.5%, which some argue is among the lowest in the nation. Proponents of the increase note that enhancing wildlife and habitat conservation aligns with the values that draw tourists to Oregon's natural attractions, supporting a vital part of the economy that provides over 200,000 jobs. "There's a perfect nexus between people who want to enjoy nature and the need to fund that experience," Helm stated, emphasizing that more funds are necessary for the ODFW's comprehensive wildlife strategy. Currently, the Department relies heavily on general fund allocations and license sales, which do not fully cover the extensive conservation needs arising from growing environmental pressures. On the flip side, local officials from travel and tourism sectors fear that an increased lodging tax may deter visitors. Some argue that Oregon's competitive positioning as a tourism destination could suffer if lodging costs rise significantly due to the tax hike. Bill Perry, president of the Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association, echoed these concerns, noting that combined lodging taxes in the Portland area are already around 16%, making the state less attractive compared to cities with lower rates. In a related context, Tillamook County is also proposing a separate four percent increase in its transient lodging tax to fund local emergency services, which voters will decide upon in the upcoming May election. This tax would be borne by visitors rather than residents, aiming to ensure that the tourism-dependent local economy remains stable amid funding shortages. As Oregon grapples with balancing the need for robust wildlife conservation with the economic realities faced by the tourism industry, the stakes remain high. The outcome of these proposals not only reflects the state’s commitment to protecting its unique biodiversity but also its recognition of the role that healthy ecosystems play in attracting visitors. With more than 300 species now projected to be in urgent need of conservation efforts, as discussed by Davia Palmeri at a recent legislative hearing, the question remains open: Can Oregon successfully implement a tax strategy that protects its wildlife while fostering a flourishing tourism economy? Readers, what are your thoughts on finding this balance? Feel free to share your perspectives in the comments below!

• Oregon
• Tourism Tax
• Wildlife Conservation