“The need to run to a toxic chemical shouldn’t be the first choice,” said Sen. Michael Moore of Millbury
By Paisley Huang
Boston University News Service
Lethal pesticides targeting rodents are also killing wildlife and pets through secondary exposure. A statewide effort aims to phase them out.
A legislative committee heard testimony on a bill sponsored by Rep. Jim Hawkins, D-Attleboro, and Sen. Michael Moore, D-Milbury, to restrict the use of anticoagulant rodenticides, which kill rats and mice by preventing their blood from clotting, while also potentially causing secondary-poisoning to animals that prey on them.
Poisoned rodents experience internal bleeding over the course of several days before dying, and second generation anticoagulant rodenticides, with stronger toxicity, generally last for four weeks in their tissues. Raptors like eagles, hawks and owls, and mammals like foxes and bobcats, are likely to catch them and consume the poison. Pet dogs and cats face similar risks.
“The need to run to a toxic chemical shouldn’t be the first choice,” Moore said. This bill is derived from California’s 2021 law that prohibits uses of SGARs, which has not led to any negative consequences, he said.
The proposed legislation will only allow the use of anticoagulant rodenticides during public health emergencies or for specific purposes, such as protecting drinking water supply.
Supporters of the bill are pushing for integrated pest management plans, a combination of pest control strategies that include sealing holes, controlling food sources, and non-poisonous ways to target rodents such as snap-traps.
More than a dozen municipalities have filed or planned to file a home rule petition to restrict the use of anticoagulant rodenticides. It will be the next step Worcester animal welfare advocates consider if the state bill fails, said Samara Ebinger, organizer of the Friends of Wildlife Worcester.
Tracking animals that have consumed rodenticides is difficult because most of them died in the wild, Ebinger said. Using reports by wildlife rehabilitators, she put together a video titled “An Incomplete List of Wildlife and Pets Poisoned by Rodenticides in Massachusetts in 2024,” documenting more than 70 poisoning cases within a year.
The New England Pest Management Association testified against the bill at the hearing. Banning anticoagulant rodenticides is like losing a tool out of the toolbox, said Adam Carace on behalf of the association, warning that small businesses will lose the most affordable method.
But not all pest control companies oppose the restrictions, Ebinger said, citing an open letter from Banner Pest Control, a Dracut exterminator that discontinued the use of SGARs in November 2024. The letter states that alternative methods like trapping and birth control are “cost-comparable, especially when factoring in long-term control.”
The pest control industry should educate consumers of the risk of rodenticides, said Shannon Phelan, the founder of Save Grafton Wildlife. She recalled that when she found rats at her house a few years ago, a pest management company came to put bait boxes containing anticoagulant rodenticides.
When Phelan expressed concerns, the pest controller “thought that ‘second generation’ meant that the chemicals have been changed so that they no longer hurt wildlife,” she said. “If they are telling people that there’s no impact, then how would people know?”
Phelan and other volunteers are now reaching out to local businesses, promoting integrated pest management over bait boxes.
“I have seen a lot of big boxes around restaurants, grocery stores, and markets. But what I have also seen right next to those boxes are open dumpsters,” she said. “There are simple ways that you could address the root problem of why you are attracting rats to your business.”
This article originally appeared in The Worcester Guardian.
