Bills: H5432, H5433, S3093, H5363, H5137, H5247

Keywords: Newbury, rodenticides, second generation anticoagulant rodenticides, SGARs, pesticides, pest control, wildlife protection, environmental regulation, local bylaw, municipal authority, private property, rodent control, anticoagulant poison, public health, Massachusetts local option, Wellfleet, fertilizer, nitrogen, phosphorus, nutrient pollution

Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a hybrid hearing on late-file bills, with testimony focused first on multiple home rule petitions seeking local authority to restrict anticoagulant rodenticides in towns including Andover, Topsfield, North Andover, Williamstown, Georgetown, Lexington, and others. Municipal officials, residents, wildlife advocates, and conservation groups described documented harm to hawks, owls, foxes, turtles, pets, and other wildlife, and argued that towns should be able to regulate these poisons locally. Several speakers said their towns had already voted to support restrictions and were using integrated pest management and other alternatives. Committee members noted that statewide rodenticide legislation had already advanced out of committee in both chambers and that the environmental bond bill was in conference committee, but no votes were taken during the hearing itself. The committee then heard testimony on H. 5137, a bill to prohibit the retail sale of parrots. Supporters, including animal welfare groups, veterinarians, rescue operators, and advocates, said parrots are often sourced from large breeding facilities with poor conditions, that many birds are surrendered because they are difficult long-term pets, and that rescues are overwhelmed. They argued the bill would encourage adoption, reduce demand for commercial breeding and trafficking, and improve bird welfare and public health. Opponents, including breeders, pet retailers, aviculture representatives, and rescue operators, said the bill would harm small businesses, reduce consumer access and transparency, and push sales to unregulated markets without improving welfare. Several speakers said the bill should instead focus on stronger standards and enforcement rather than banning sales. A separate bill, S. 310, designating the Marion Stoddard River Walk, was also briefly discussed in testimony supporting Marion Stoddard’s environmental work. The hearing ended after the committee finished taking testimony and adjourned; no roll-call votes or formal actions were taken in the transcript.

Bills: H5432, H5433, S3093, H5363, H5137, H5247

Keywords: Newbury, rodenticides, second generation anticoagulant rodenticides, SGARs, pesticides, pest control, wildlife protection, environmental regulation, local bylaw, municipal authority, private property, rodent control, anticoagulant poison, public health, Massachusetts local option, Wellfleet, fertilizer, nitrogen, phosphorus, nutrient pollution

Transcript Highlights:

• and ban the SGARs.
• So please pass bills. ...on SGARs.
• I found SGARs at my school, at stores, and I also found a box that had SGARs in a pool of water that
• eating the SGARs.
• They will gorge on the SGARs.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a hybrid hearing on a large slate of bills focused on pesticides, pollinators, rodenticides, mosquito control, invasive species, and local authority over pesticide regulation. Chair Becca Rausch set strict two-minute testimony limits due to the very large number of speakers. Early testimony from Senator Moore and Representative Hawkins strongly supported a bill to restrict second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, citing harms to wildlife, pets, and public health, and noting that California has already adopted a similar model. Testimony also supported a Lowell home rule petition to allow the city to prohibit or restrict these rodenticides, with local officials describing documented raptor poisonings and municipal efforts to phase out use on city property. A major portion of the hearing focused on pollinator protection and neonicotinoid-treated seeds. Witnesses from environmental groups, conservation organizations, academics, and beekeepers argued that neonics harm bees and other beneficial insects, contaminate soil and water, and provide little or no economic benefit in most corn and soybean fields. Several speakers pointed to New York, Vermont, and Quebec as models for restricting treated seeds, and one panel cited research showing only a small percentage of fields benefit economically from the treatments. Support was also voiced for a bill establishing an ecologically based mosquito management program, with advocates criticizing aerial and truck spraying and urging non-chemical, locally tailored approaches. Other testimony supported bills to reform the pesticide board and pesticide regulation process, to give vulnerable municipalities more local control over pesticide use, to protect schoolchildren from pesticides on school grounds, and to respond to invasive species through a centralized state office, coordinator, strategic plan, and trust fund. Many speakers, including representatives from Mass Audubon, MSPCA, the Xerces Society, the Sierra Club, watershed groups, and local wildlife rehabilitators, described impacts on hawks, owls, pets, fish, and broader ecosystems. No votes were taken during the hearing, and committee members generally asked few questions, with the hearing remaining in testimony mode throughout.

Transcript Highlights:

• You've heard a lot from other members and past hearings about the risks of these SGARs.
• SGARs are a poison that cause to further restrict or prohibit SGARs within their communities.
• SGARs are a poison that cause severe pain and have no place in our communities.
• This is just one example of many species of wildlife who suffer from SGARs.
• I'm trying... ...similarly poisoned by SGARs.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a hearing on several late-file bills and home rule petitions, with testimony focused mainly on coastal access and wildlife management, rodenticide restrictions, and a local land-use request. Rep. Scarsdale testified for H.5113, which would name an accessible trail in Groton’s J. Harry Rich State Forest the Marion Stoddard River Walk in honor of the activist who helped restore the Nashua River. Groton Trails Committee chair Paul Fung also supported the bill, describing the trail, educational signs, and DCR’s involvement. Rep. Sweezey presented a package of Duxbury Beach bills—H.5141, H.5140, and H.5139—intended to align state shorebird protections more closely with federal standards, create parity in beach management tools, and require periodic review of outdated recreational-use guidelines; he said the bills were developed with local and agency input and aimed to balance conservation with beach access. A large portion of the hearing concerned local petitions to restrict second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides and other pesticides. Supporters from Mass Audubon, Sierra Club, Animal Defenders International, wildlife rehabilitation groups, and residents from towns including Grafton, Billerica, Manchester-by-the-Sea, Eastham, and Truro argued that these poisons harm raptors and other non-target wildlife through secondary poisoning, persist in the environment, and are increasingly ineffective. Several speakers said local town meetings had approved the restrictions and urged favorable reports on the petitions. Opponents, including a representative of the New England Pest Management Association, argued that regulation should remain at the state level under MDAR to avoid a patchwork of local rules and noted that the agency was already reviewing rodenticide regulations. Committee members asked questions about agency consultation, the relationship between state and federal bird listings, and how local beach rules would work in practice. The committee also heard testimony on H.4700 and related local pesticide-reduction petitions for Eastham and Truro, with witnesses describing groundwater concerns, pesticide drift, and wildlife impacts. Finally, the committee took testimony on S.2961, a Dighton bill authorizing the use of a small portion of conservation land for public way purposes to replace the Pleasant Street Bridge and add pedestrian and bicycle accommodations; the witness said the affected area was limited and necessary for safety improvements. The hearing ended after testimony concluded, with the chair turning the gavel over and the committee adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• CHAIRMAN THAT IS THE SGAR. >> Senator Rouson: QUESTIONS ON SGAR. >> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The second main point is that commercial use of SGARs is projected to grow.
• And the last point is that even though in 2015 the EPA banned consumer use of SGARs, consumer use continues

Keywords: 1191, senate, all