HB 3978 would restrict certain animal research activities in Oregon and create a planning process to phase out nonhuman primate research at the Oregon National Primate Research Center at Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU). The bill prohibits research facilities from using public funds to directly support medically unnecessary laboratory research on dogs or cats when the work falls into USDA pain-and-distress categories D or E, while exempting veterinary education and clinical veterinary research. It also bars research or testing on nonhuman primates at the OHSU primate center, with that prohibition becoming operative on May 1, 2029, and excepting research funded by grants obtained before the bill’s effective date.
The measure further requires OHSU to publish expanded annual information about nonhuman primates at the university, including breeding, births, purchases or sales, welfare citations, related research links, funding totals, and accreditation documentation. In addition, it establishes the Task Force on Planning the Elimination of Research on Nonhuman Primates, which must develop a detailed transition plan covering workforce impacts, grant obligations, humane disposition or relocation of animals, facility changes, compliance requirements, and a phaseout schedule. The task force must report to the Legislature by January 15, 2026, and is set to sunset in 2041.
HB 3978 would amend Oregon public meetings law to exempt task force meetings from open-meeting requirements and would also make conforming changes to ORS 192.690 and ORS 353.090. The bill includes delayed operative dates for some provisions, including the primate-research ban and the expanded reporting requirements, and declares an emergency so it would take effect immediately upon passage. Its practical effect would be to constrain how public money can be used for certain dog and cat experiments, prohibit primate research at the OHSU center after the operative date, and impose new transparency and planning obligations on OHSU and the state.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the available context does not show formal legislative debate or a vote history. Based on the bill’s structure and sponsors, the measure appears to be driven by animal-welfare concerns and a desire to end primate research at the OHSU center in an orderly way. The bill’s tone suggests a policy preference for phasing out controversial animal research while managing employee, grant, and animal-care transitions.
The main points of contention likely involve the scope and timing of the restrictions, especially the ban on nonhuman primate research at OHSU, the use of public funds for certain dog and cat research, and the operational and financial consequences for the university and its workforce. Potential concerns also include the exemption from public meetings law for the task force, the handling of existing grants, and how remaining animals would be cared for or relocated. Supporters would likely emphasize animal welfare, transparency, and a planned transition, while opponents may focus on research impacts, institutional autonomy, and implementation costs.
HB 3978 would add new restrictions to Oregon law governing animal research, including a ban on direct public funding for medically unnecessary laboratory research on dogs or cats in certain USDA pain-and-distress categories and a prohibition on nonhuman primate research at the OHSU Oregon National Primate Research Center beginning May 1, 2029. It would also require expanded annual public reporting by OHSU on primate use, breeding, funding, welfare citations, and accreditation, and it would create a temporary task force to plan the elimination of primate breeding and research. The bill amends ORS 353.090 and ORS 192.690 and would affect OHSU, research facilities, researchers, and state agencies involved in oversight or support of animal research.
The bill appears generally supportive of animal-welfare reform and phaseout planning, with its sponsors advancing a clear policy to end certain forms of animal research and increase transparency. The absence of committee testimony or votes means there is no recorded public debate in the provided materials, but the bill’s detailed transition provisions suggest an effort to address practical concerns while pursuing a strong substantive restriction. Overall, the measure reads as a proactive, reform-oriented proposal rather than a compromise bill.
Likely contention centers on the prohibition of nonhuman primate research at OHSU’s primate center, which would directly affect a major research institution and could raise concerns about scientific research capacity, grant obligations, and workforce impacts. Another likely point of dispute is the restriction on public funding for certain dog and cat research, especially where institutions may argue the work has scientific or medical value. The task force’s exemption from public meetings law may also draw scrutiny because it limits public visibility into the planning process. Supporters are likely to focus on animal welfare, humane disposition, and transparency, while opponents may emphasize research freedom, operational disruption, and the cost of compliance.