State board proposes updating certain pesticide rules amid conservation concerns

The New Hampshire Pesticide Control Board on Monday released a proposal to restrict the use of certain chemicals that scientists say may be harming wildlife.

The proposed changes to the rule known as Pes 700 would impose new restrictions on a handful of chemicals used to kill rodents and insects. But the limits are less restrictive than what some legislators initially proposed earlier this year, including in two bills currently in interim study in the Senate.

Regarding the changes to insecticide rules, “It’s a step in the right direction, and it’s excellent progress,” said Tonya Albee, a retired business owner turned native plant gardener from Wolfeboro, after the Monday morning meeting. But Albee remains concerned about the effects of insecticides on native insect populations in New Hampshire and the Northeast. 

The insecticide rule change proposed Monday would add restrictions to the allowed uses of four chemicals known as neonicotinoids, which can be toxic for pollinators, aquatic insects, and other native species in addition to pests. Neonicotinoids are one area of concern among scientists studying the decrease in insect diversity occurring in New Hampshire and beyond.

The ingredients would be restricted from use on turf or lawn, or prohibited from outdoor use altogether, according to the language of the proposed rule. But both those restrictions carry exceptions: For example, neonicotinoids could still be used on turf in a case where the Department of Agriculture, Markets, and Food has deemed the pest they are being used to target “seriously threatens the state or any part thereof,” according to state law. Other exemptions include allowing the chemicals to be used by an individual with a license or permit from the department; in enclosed greenhouses; or on the exterior of a home to target wood-destroying insects.

Earlier this year, legislators sought more restrictions on a longer list of neonicotinoid pesticides in House Bill 1431, proposed by Wolfeboro Republican Rep. John MacDonald. While some conservationists spoke in support of the measure, some farmers also reacted with apprehension, saying they relied on access to those insecticides to protect their crops from potentially devastating infestations. The Senate ultimately referred the bill for interim study.

During the legislative session, the New Hampshire Farm Bureau opposed HB 1431. But in an email Monday afternoon, Policy Director/Administrator Robert Johnson II said the bureau supported the latest actions of the Pesticide Control Board.

Farmers who are not already licensed pesticide applicators might have to undergo training to continue using the chemicals, he said. But many are already licensed, he said, making the rule change less disruptive.

More from this section

New Hampshire's K-1 Fiancé Visa Numbers: How the State Ranks Nationally

+2

New Hampshire has 2 billionaires, see who they are

How much does assisted living cost in New Hampshire?

Albee said while she would support more restrictions in the future, she is in favor of taking smaller steps to get there in order to avoid conflict with farmers.

“I’d like to see a much broader ban on things, but I think that it’s one step at a time, and we don’t want to have pesticide applicators and farmers think that we’re suddenly going to try to go after everything that they think they need,” she said. 

The Pesticide Control Board’s proposed rule shared on Monday also includes potential changes to how some rodenticides, which target small mammals like mice and rats, are classified. 

Certain kinds of rodenticide, referred to as anticoagulants, work by taking away the ability of blood to clot, causing death by internal bleeding. But the slow-working chemicals can also be passed on to predators that feed on recently poisoned prey, and this can lead to secondary poisoning of those non-target animals. New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game scientists expressed concern earlier this year that this phenomenon could be contributing to downturns in the populations of certain ecologically important predator species, like fishers.

The rule change proposed on Monday would see three anticoagulant rodenticides added to the state’s list of restricted-use pesticides, which may be used only by licensed applicators.

This portion of the proposed rules may have more of an effect on farm life than the insecticide changes, according to Johnson, since those who use rodenticide to ward off pests from food and livestock feed stores are less likely, in his estimation, to already have a license.

Regarding rodenticides, as with neonicotinoids, some lawmakers initially sought stricter regulations during the recent legislative session. Rep. Cathryn Harvey, a Spofford Democrat, sought an all-out ban on four anticoagulants in House Bill 1018, which was defeated in the House. Meanwhile, House Bill 1676, from prime sponsor and Hollis Republican Rep. Liz Barbour, proposed limiting the purchase of several “high risk” anticoagulant rodenticides to licensed pest control professionals. HB 1676 was sent for interim study by the Senate this spring.

The Monday announcement kicks off the formal rulemaking process, the next step of which will be a public hearing — though the soonest that could take place would be November, and it may also be pushed to early 2027, according to Department of Agriculture, Markets, and Food Commissioner Shawn Jasper.