THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Department of Agricultural Resources
225 Turnpike Road, 3rd Floor, Southborough, MA 01772
www.mass.gov/agr
MAURA T. HEALEY KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL REBECCA L. TEPPER ASHLEY E. RANDLE
Governor Lt. Governor Secretary Commissioner
TO: Senate and House Clerks
Joint Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment
FROM: Taryn LaScola, Director of Crop and Pest Services
DATE: August 13, 2024
REGARDING: End of Year Report
INTRODUCTION
The Massachusetts Department Agricultural Resources (“MDAR”) is the lead state agency for pesticide oversight
and regulation in the Commonwealth under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) as
well as the Massachusetts Pesticide Control Act (M.G.L. c. 132B) (“Act’) and its regulations promulgated at 333
CMR (“Regulations”). Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 132B, Section 5A, MDAR is required to submit an annual report to
Clerks of the Senate and the House of Representatives and the Joint Committee on Natural Resources and
Agriculture describing the efforts taken and the progress made toward reducing pesticide use. This document
serves as that report for the federal fiscal year 2023, October 1, 2022, through September 30, 2023
The Pesticide Program, which falls under the Division of Crop and Pest Services within MDAR, carries out the day-
to-day responsibilities of regulating pesticides in the Commonwealth, including the licensing of pesticide
applicators, the registration of pesticide products, and the enforcement of the Act and Regulations. In addition,
the Pesticide Program carries out other pesticide related activities in support of the regulatory mandate, such as
education, outreach, and water monitoring. The Pesticide Program also acts as support staff for the Pesticide
Board, Pesticide Board Subcommittee, Pesticide Applicator Advisory Council, and Conservationist Advisory
Council.
While MDAR enforces the Act and Regulations, the following bodies are established in statute and regulation to
support its work:
• Pesticide Board (“Board”): A 13-member board made up of state agencies and members of the public.
The Board’s role is to advise MDAR on the implementation of the Act and Regulations. It is also the
authority on approving any regulatory change. See, M.G.L. c. 132B, Section 3.
• Pesticide Board Subcommittee (“Subcommittee”): A five-member board that is made up of state
agencies and members of the public. The Subcommittee registers products for use in the state. See,
M.G.L. c. 132B, Section 3A.
• Pesticide Applicator Advisory Council: A five-member body established by the Board and comprised of
individuals in the pesticide industry. Its role is to advise the Board relative to the development of policy or
the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulation. See, 333 CMR 4.00.
• Conservationist Advisory Council: A five-member body established by the Board and comprised of
individuals who are experienced in the conservation and protection of the environment. Its role is to
advise the Board relative to the development of policy or the adoption, amendment, or repeal of
regulation. See, 333 CMR 4.00.
Each year, MDAR staff must prioritize where MDAR’s efforts should be made. Considerations taken when
prioritizing include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Resources (staff and funds);
• Federal responsibilities;
• Legislative mandates (state and federal);
• Changes in regulation;
• Enforcement trends;
• Complaints (which take precedent over routine inspections); and
• Stakeholder/public requests and needs.
INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT AND THE REDUCTION OF PESTICIDE USE
Integrated Pest Management
Integrated Pest Management (“IPM”) is defined at 333 CMR 14.02 as “A comprehensive strategy of pest control
whose major objective is to achieve desired levels of pest control in an environmentally responsible manner by
combining multiple pest control measures to reduce the need for reliance on chemical pesticides; more specifically,
a combination of pest controls which addresses conditions that support pests and may include, but not be limited
to, the use of monitoring techniques to determine immediate and ongoing need for pest control, increased
sanitation, physical barrier methods, the use of natural pest enemies and a judicious use of lowest risk pesticides
when necessary.” IPM is a “common sense” approach to pest management and is implemented through the
following steps:
1. Identifying the pest;
2. Determining the threshold for the pest, which will be dependent on a number of variables;
3. Identifying the reason/cause for the pest;
4. Controlling the pest using the best tools available for the situation such as mechanical, cultural, chemical
controls; and
5. Eliminating or reducing the reason/cause for the pest.
IPM is a strategy that pest management professionals are familiar with and are constantly trained on. In order for
an individual to maintain a license, they must receive continuing education units (“credits”). While trainings may
not be specific IPM as a whole, it is important to note that most trainings include IPM elements as listed above.
For examples, trainings approved for credits include but are not limited to:
• Pest Identification and history;
• Pest management strategies (which include mechanical, cultural, chemical controls);
• Laws and regulations;
• Best management practices; and
• Pesticide safety.
MDAR conducted a survey (See Attachment A) among 110 entities that have historically offered pesticide type
trainings to licensed applicators. The survey asked whether IPM or elements of IPM were provided in trainings.
Thirty-nine (39) entities responded with just one of the entities reporting they do not provide trainings. The
survey found the following:
TOPIC NUMBER OF ENTITIES THAT HAVE PROVIDED TRAININGS
Integrated Pest Management (as a whole) 38
Best Management Practices 33
Mechanical Controls 31
Pest Identification 36
Pesticide Laws and Regulations 34
Pesticide Safety (Environment and Health) 36
Proper Use of Pesticides 34
Page 2 of 28
 Less Toxic Pesticide Alternatives (Minimum Risk, 29
Organic, Biologicals, etc)
Cultural Controls 27
Pest Trapping/Monitoring 27
Pest Management Strategies 32
Pest Forecasting Tools 12
Pest Thresholds 21
Reduction in Pesticide Use
MDAR requires that all licensed applicators submit an Annual Pesticide Use report. This report is an overall
summary of what products a company uses. While it could be used to examine pesticide use in the state, it is
important to remember that it does not capture homeowner use or any applications that do not require a license
and therefore it is difficult to determine how much pesticide is being used in the state from year to year.
Referencing the steps of IPM, there are many elements that factor into whether or not someone choses to use a
pesticide.
It is important to understand that pest pressures and environments constantly change and therefore the reaction
to the pest pressure will also change. Climate, individual habits, historical management practices, requirements
from other regulatory agencies, and infrastructure changes are just a few things that may affect pest pressure.
Additionally, pests and their pressure differ from county to county, town to town and address to address. For
example:
• Mosquito populations and the threat of arborvirus change from year to year and therefore the
management practices will change. In a year where there are high levels of arborvirus more pesticides
may be used to manage them versus in years when the threat of arborvirus is low. Additionally, the
mosquitoes that carry arborvirus are typically found in one part of the state. If arborvirus is found in a
different part of the state that area may now have increased their pesticide use versus an area that does
not harbor mosquitoes that carry arborvirus.
• There are often town by-laws that put a zero-tolerance or extremely low threshold on pest pressure (ie:
low pest threshold) and then require specific types of pest management for a restaurant to stay in
business. New restaurants opening or existing ones closing may affect the amount of pesticides used in
that town/area/property based on the number of establishments that have these requirements.
• A pest that was not previously “established” may become established in an area. Pesticides may be used
to control that pest to attempt to contain or control the pest, which may lead to an increase in pesticide
use. If the pest is eradicated, then the use is reduced.
In order for MDAR to accurately determine if pesticide use has increased or decreased from year to year, it would
require statute/regulatory change to allow for additional tracking of sales and use. Significant additional
resources, research, and analysis would be required to gather such data.
COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT
Enforcement Program
The enforcement program is charged with ensuring that the use, which includes but is not limited to, the
application of pesticides, is performed within the confines of the Act and regulations as well as FIFRA. In the
federal Fiscal Year of 2023, MDAR had the following staff in the enforcement program:
• Pesticide Inspector (4)
• Rights of Way Inspector (1)
• Chief Inspector (1)
Page 3 of 28
 Inspectors conduct inspections that include, but are not limited to:
• Record inspections;
• Worker Protection Standard inspections;
• Marketplace inspections;
• Producer Establishment inspections;
• School inspections;
• Use observations;
• Rights of Way inspections;
• Investigations;
• License checks; and
• Dealer inspections.
If violations are found, enforcement actions are issued. Enforcement actions include, but are not limited to:
• Letter of Warning;
• Administrative Order;
• Notice of Assessments (fine);
• License Revocation; and
• License Suspension.
Inspections Completed
MDAR continued to monitor pesticide use, storage, sales, and labeling throughout the Commonwealth. Overall, a
total of 252 pesticide inspections/investigations covering a wide range of pesticide use in the Commonwealth
were completed in FY23 (See Tables 1 and 2).
Table 1. FY23 Inspections Completed
Inspection Type Inspections Physical Documentary
Completed Samples Samples
Collected Collected
Agricultural Use 18 3
*WPS Tier I 12
*WPS Tier II 1
Agricultural Use 14 52
Follow-up
Non-Ag Use 66 18
Non-Ag Use Follow-up 36 40 1
Experimental Use
Producer Establishment 3 3
Marketplace 77
Import
Export
Applicator Records 40
Restricted Use Pesticide 6
Dealer
Total 260 110 4
* Worker Protection Standard (“WPS”) inspections are reported as a subset of Agricultural Use Inspections.
Page 4 of 28
Table 2. FY23 Enforcement Actions
Inspection Type Warning Fine Licensing Criminal Admin. Referrals Other
Letter Action Action Hearings to EPA
Agricultural Use 3
Agricultural Use 3 7*
Follow-up
Non-Ag Use 5
Non-Ag Use 26 1 1 2*
Follow-up
Experimental
Use
Producer
Establishment
Marketplace 5
Import
Export
Applicator 1
Records
Restricted Use
Pesticide Dealer
Total 44 0 1 0 0 1 9*
*Denotes an Administrative Order
Compliance Verification was documented by three methods:
1. First, a re-inspection of the violating firm occurs within time constraints set forth in the specific Letter of
Warning or Administrative Order issued.
2. Next, the Pesticide Program sends a written document describing any and all documented violations to a
firm which has been found to be out of compliance. This document contains a statement that describes
how and when compliance was attained and is signed by the respondent and notarized.
3. Finally, the receipt of payment for case assessed fines. There were six case assessed fines during FY23.
Rights of Way (ROW) Program
333 CMR 11.00 provides requirements relative to applications of herbicides to manage ROW. It requires that
Vegetation Management Plans (“VMP”) and Yearly Operational Plans (“YOP”) be developed and submitted to
MDAR for review and approval. The ROW Program received forty-one (41) Yearly Operational Plans (“YOP”).
YOPs consist of the product name(s), rates and use amounts of pesticides to be applied along a specific Right of
Way. It also identifies the individual areas to be applied to, and as applicable, the identification of “sensitive
areas” (as defined in 333 CMR 11.00) where limits or prohibitions in application practices are warranted. The
plans are reviewed and if needed, comments and/or edits are made by the ROW Coordinator. This process closed
with the acceptance of 40 finalized YOPs.
Vegetation Management Plans (“VMP”) provide a comprehensive overview of vegetation control for a given Right
of Way. VMPs describe potential methods of vegetation control which may include the following: herbicides;
mechanical and biological methods; or a combination of the three. Integrated Pest Management (“IPM”) and—in
the case of ROWs—IVM (Integrated Vegetation Management) play a prominent role in the MDAR ROW Program.
As such, the IPM-IVM approach for the specific ROW is outlined in the VMP and the YOP. The VMPs are valid for
five years, and then the plan process must start over again. A proposed VMP is part of the public record for the
Commonwealth, and comments are sought in written format as well as at public hearings held in areas traversed
by the Right of Way.
Page 5 of 28
For FY23, five (5) VMPs were reviewed by the ROW Advisory Panel and MDAR staff and approved by the
Commissioner in accordance with 333 CMR 11.00.
Pesticides and Bees/Pollinators
The Pesticide Inspectors work closely with State Apiary Inspectors when following up on allegations of pesticide
related bee kills. The Apiary program will vet the call first to determine if a pesticide may be the cause of the
issue. If they believe it is, then they will reach out to the Pesticide Inspectors and begin following up on the
complaint together.
The Apiary Program received 18 alleged pesticide complaints. After initial vetting, two were followed up on.
Samples taken of adult bees revealed that one bee kill was likely caused by the combination of pyrethrin
pesticides, bacteria, and viruses. The source of the pesticide was not able to be determined.
The other complaint did not have any pesticides detected in the sample and suspected to be due to a fungal
pathogen found in the sample.
PRODUCT REGISTRATION AND PESTICIDE LICENSING
Pesticide Product Registration
Any person who has obtained a pesticide product registration from the EPA must then apply for a registration
with MDAR. The registrant, or an agent acting on behalf of the registrant, is required to submit an “Application for
New Pesticide Registration,” a Material Safety Data Sheet (“MSDS”), and a product label. New products are
usually registered by the Subcommittee on a monthly basis. Every product label is thoroughly reviewed for
compliance with state and federal laws and then brought to the Subcommittee for consideration. Accepted
products are categorized in three ways:
• State Restricted Use Pesticide (“SRUP”) classification: A Federal General Use pesticide product registered
by the Commonwealth may be classified as either general use or reclassified as State Restricted Use based
upon its use pattern or the potential to become a groundwater contaminant.
• Special Local Needs (“SLN”) registration: Wh