Policy & Advocacy

NOFA/Mass advocates for sustainable agricultural and landcare policies that strengthen the resilience of our local communities. Our policy team works on issues as diverse as food, agricultural and climate justice, toxins reduction, pollinator protection, and ecological health and regulations which support organic and regenerative farms.

Our members drive our policy work at the local, state and federal level. The more members we have, the more resources we have to effect change in the world –  we need financial resources to pay our organizers and, more importantly – people power to influence decision makers. Read on to find out how you can get involved, and please consider becoming a member and increase your impact by making a donation.

Participate in the democratic process: Speak for the soils and an organic future!

FAQs for Advocates

From our friends a The MA Food System Collaborative

Recent Victories

January 2023 – In the final hours of the informal session on January 3, 2023, the legislature passed a consolidated pesticide bill through both chambers (S.3181) which combined the provisions of two of our top priority pesticide bills: a measure to protect schoolchildren from pesticides (H.926) and a measure to modernize pesticide reporting (H.4931). The latter had been previously passed by the House in June 2022. This endorsement of these provisions during the informal session is a momentous victory for our movement and allows us to begin the 2023-24 formal session with fresh and significant momentum for pesticides reform.

September 2022 – Several significant pesticide reform measures were approved (reported favorably) by the Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture during the 2021-22 session, as well as measures regarding Food Justice and Equity in Agriculture.

Several proposals supported by the grassroots now have increased political momentum to build upon next session, including:

-Establishing a “pesticide control modernization and environmental protection task force” (H.4601)

-Limiting what pesticides can be applied to playgrounds (H.926)

-Digitizing annual pesticide reporting (H.4931)

-Banning consumer use of glyphosate-containing herbicides (H.929/S.575)

-Establishing a commission to address racial disparities in agricultural programs and create Community Land Trusts to create food security jobs (S.2880)

-Funding farming and food security jobs in frontline food insecure communities (S.564/H.973)

July 2022 – The MA Food System Collaborative led a successful campaign to include several important provisions in the 2023 state budget. In addition to increased funding for HIP, a provision for investment in UMass Extension was a top budget priority for NOFA/Mass, which we are grateful to see included. UMass Extension, which provides essential education and technical assistance to farmers, received $620,000 to upgrade their soil testing equipment and to hire new educators focused on issues such as soil health, urban agriculture, pollinators, and addressing invasive pests while reducing the use of pesticides.

October 2021 – As a direct result of increasing calls for pesticide reform, MDAR convened an official Conservationist Pesticide Advisory Council to advise the Pesticide Board on the development of statewide pesticide policies and regulations. Until recently, only the pesticide industry had an advisory council which advised the Board. Our calls for reform of pesticide rules through the regulatory process will be heard even louder moving forward.

April 2021 – As part of the FY22 budget, legislators approved an appropriation for $50,000 to create a commission to “conduct a scientific review of the potential impacts of glyphosate and its most common alternative herbicides on the environment and public health.” It will also include a review of the potential impacts of glyphosate on endangered and threatened species. The Pesticide Subcommittee is directed to use the scientific review as part of an individual review of glyphosate and whether current uses should be altered.

March 2021 – We successfully pressured the Mass. Pesticide Board Subcommittee to pass a motion to protect pollinators by restricting the use of neonicotinoid pesticides (“neonics”), effectively removing these pesticides from store shelves by July 2022. NOFA/Mass had been organizing with a coalition of beekeepers and environmentalists since 2015 to pass similar legislation and to hold state regulators accountable.

January 2021 – Governor Baker signed into law the Massachusetts Healthy Soils Bill as part of an Economic Development bill. This legislation was originally co-authored by NOFA/Mass Policy Director and is supported by a coalition of healthy soils advocates organized by NOFA/Mass. The bill creates a Healthy Soils Program within the MA State Commission for Conservation of Soil, Water & Related Resources. NOFA/Mass is now working with legislative allies to allocate supplemental funding for the program.

In 2018 the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy an Environmental Affairs, after having heard a presentation on soil carbon restoration by former NOFA/Mass Policy Director Jack Kittredge, proposed a $100,000 budget appropriation to fund the creation of a Massachusetts Healthy Soils Action Plan. The contract was awarded to Regenerative Design Group, which invited to the project team two NOFA/Mass staff members, Caro Roszell and Marty Dagoberto. The results of the 18 month stakeholder engagement process are expected to be published spring 2021 and will provide a state-approved roadmap for policy makers and land managers.

August 2020 – we were successful in securing direct representation for organic agriculture on the “21st Century Mosquito Disease Management Task Force.” Working with a coalition of advocacy groups, we achieved significant redrafts of the Governor’s arbovirus management bill, limiting powers granted and providing for much greater transparency. We continue to advocate for an ecological approach to mosquito disease management.

Coalition Support

NOFA/Mass is part of several national coalitions and networks. Learn about our national partnerships and coalitions, here: Partnerships and Coalitions

State Action – Our 2025-2026 Legislative Priorities

Beacon Hill

In Massachusetts, legislative sessions begin on January 1 and last two years. An average of 6,000-10,000 bills are filed every session. However, less than 10% are passed and become state law.  Learn how bills are created and passed in the state legislature.

Below is a brief listing of our priority bills which have been filed for the 2025-2026 session.

Create a Pesticide Reform Task Force (S.617/H.932) – A bill to create a “pesticide control modernization and environmental protection task force” was advanced favorably last session and is a top priority for pesticide reform advocates this session, as it will help address a host of systemic concerns in a holistic manner. 

Center Farmers within PFAS reforms (S.56/H.109) – NOFA/Mass is joining with a coalition of food system advocacy groups to encourage lawmakers to include measures in pending legislation to ensure that the burden of protecting our families and ecosystems from these “forever chemicals” does not fall on our farmers.

Promote Ecological Mosquito Control (S.547/H.985) – We must end the broadscale aerial application of pesticides and support a scientifically based mosquito-borne disease management program. This would protect public health while minimizing environmental and public health risks associated with some forms of (pesticide-dependent) mosquito control.

Read more about these and other important bills, below.

Read about the latest policy issues affecting Massachusetts farmers and consumers in our monthly “Policy and Advocacy” newsletter and receive time-sensitive alerts directly in your inbox.

Newsletter signup icon

Recent Newsletters

“An Act relative to the pesticide board”

S.617/H.932 filed by Sen. Jason Lewis & Representative Mindy Domb.

Background

This comprehensive pesticide reform bill would establish a task force to be known as the “pesticide control modernization and environmental protection task force.” The task force would “review and make recommendations to improve the ability of the Commonwealth to prevent and mitigate adverse impacts of pesticide use on the environment and public health.”

Lack of useful data about pesticide use: The existing reports are dense and challenging to extract useful information from. They also do not track geographic data on pesticide applications. There is no baseline for statewide pesticides use. 

Lack of public input: The Pesticide Board and the Pesticide Board Subcommittee do not solicit public comment on agenda items such as pesticide registrations and rarely acknowledge written comments. Public Hearings are the rare occasion when public comments are solicited.

Pressure from legislators is critical. It wasn’t until 6 months after the precursor of this bill was filed in March 2021 (H.922) that MDAR announced it was establishing a new Pesticide Advisory Council to represent “conservationist interests.” Prior to 2022, the only Pesticide Advisory Council established under 333 CMR 4 (2004) represented pesticide applicators.

Details of the bill

The task force will consist of members/designees of EOEEA (chair), MDAR, DEP, DPH, ENRA Committee, Public Health Committee, Consumer Protection Committee, minority leaders and 19 additional members appointed by ENRA chairs, including: an academic expert in environmental or health impacts of pesticides, an ecotoxicologist, a licensed pesticide applicator, a representative of pesticide manufacturers, a veterinarian with expertise in pesticide impacts on animals, a member of a town natural resources commission or equivalent, a member of a city natural resources commission or equivalent and representatives of statewide organizations representing (one each) land conservation, river protection, wildlife protection, farms and agriculture, organic farms and agriculture, beekeepers or groups concerned about pollinators, lawn care, nursery and landscape, consumer protection, horticultural or grower association, cranberry growers, retailers.

The issues examined by the task force shall include, but not be limited to:

(i) the structure, membership, and operation of the pesticide board and the pesticide board subcommittee within the department of agricultural resources;

(ii) the ability of the pesticide board and pesticide board subcommittee to effectively interact with other state agencies, stakeholders, and the public;

(iii) the commonwealth’s relationship with federal pesticide regulators and ability to implement federal pesticide regulations on the state level in a manner consistent with pesticide use reduction goals;

(iv) the effectiveness of chapter 132B of the general laws and other state and federal statutes in reducing harmful impacts of pesticide use;

(v) the ability of the pesticide board and the pesticide board subcommittee to quickly and effectively implement science-based regulation of pesticides and pesticide products;

(vi) the effectiveness of the commonwealth’s licensing and continuing education process for pesticide users in promoting responsible, limited use of pesticides and reducing adverse impacts of pesticide use;

(vii) the implementation of section 5A of said chapter 132B as it pertains to pesticide use reduction and annual reporting requirements;

(viii) opportunities to expand integrated pest management planning and practices to additional public lands;

(ix) the accessibility and transparency of the commonwealth’s pesticide use reporting system; and

(x) public awareness and education regarding pesticide use and its environmental and health impacts.

“An Act protecting our soil and farms from PFAS contamination”

S.2802/H.4853 filed by Senator Jo Comerford and Rep. James Arena-DeRosa

Background

NOFA/Mass is joining with a coalition of food system advocacy groups to encourage lawmakers to include in pending legislation measures to ensure that the burden of protecting our families and ecosystems from these “forever chemicals” does not fall on our farmers.

The chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been widely used since the 1950s in products ranging from food packaging to fire fighting foam. PFAS have recently been recognized as contaminants in agriculture and are believed to largely be entering soil through the application of biosolids, industrial sludges and ashes, and contaminated compost which may contain these compounds that are difficult to break down. (Visit our PFAS resources page)

Farmers want to enhance their role in ensuring that the food supply is safe. This legislation was  drafted with direct input from farmers and farmer-advocacy organizations. As new regulations and laws about PFAS come out, we need to ensure the ability of Massachusetts farmers’ to continue producing food and remain financially viable.

What this bill would do:

This bill will provide financial and liability relief should farmers’ ability to grow crops be impacted by PFAS contamination. It will also provide funding for technical assistance and education to help farmers adapt to new practices that reduce the use and dispersion of PFAS.

An Agricultural PFAS Relief Fund created by the bill will fund the testing of soil, water, or agricultural products for PFAS; pay for costs incurred from adapting management and business practices as a result of prohibiting PFAS-containing inputs; income replacement for interrupted operations due to discovery of contaminated land and provide for potential land buy-outs; educational resources for farmers; remediation practices and needed infrastructure for the elimination of PFAS, and other similar costs.

This bill helps set some standards for the production and use of certain soil amendments that have been known to be vectors for PFAS and prohibits the retail sale of any fertilizer, compost, mulch, top soil replacement, or other soil amendments that have not been tested for the presence of PFAS.

Finally, the bill will mitigate any potential further PFAS contamination of agricultural soils. Currently there is no testing for PFAS of biosolids, which are often applied as a fertilizer in conventional agriculture nor is there tracking of where treated biosolids are spread in Massachusetts. This bill will require testing of treated sewage sludge for PFAS if it is being used to fertilize agricultural land or other land application uses and track where it is spread.

“An Act relative to improving pesticide protections for Massachusetts schoolchildren.”

S.2805/H.124 filed by Senator Jason Lewis & Representatives Carmine Gentile and Mary Keefe.

This bill would:

  • Expand the areas protected from harmful pesticide use to include locations where children are present other than schools, including property occupied by the Department of Children and Families, facilities of the juvenile court, facilities of the Department of Youth Services, and fields for youth sports and recreation.
  • Limit pesticide use in areas where children are present to only those pesticides which have been found not to be harmful by the EPA, unless a waiver has been granted.

Many Massachusetts schools and child care centers permit the use of an arsenal of toxic pesticides on outdoor grounds, including glyphosate and 2,4-D, potentially endangering children’s health.

Children are especially vulnerable to toxic pesticides.

  • Children absorb more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults.
  • Children’s organ systems are still developing and are less able to detoxify harmful chemicals.
  • In 2012 the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) called for governments to reduce children’s exposure to pesticides, writing that scientific evidence “demonstrates associations between early life exposure to pesticides and pediatric cancers, decreased cognitive function, and behavioral problems.”

Learn more about children and pesticides HERE

“An act restricting the use of rodenticides in the environment”

S.2721/H.965 filed by Senator Michael Moore and Rep James Hawkins.

This bill would:

  • End the registration and reregistration of anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs), unless deemed necessary for a public health emergency by MDAR.
  • Enable MDAR to establish a process and standards for the limited use of ARs by licensed applicators in public health emergencies
  • Require MDAR to report annually and include on its website information regarding the emergency use of ARs including locations where ARs were used, the types and amounts used, the contents of ongoing rodent control plans, and relevant accompanying documents

A female bald eagle found dead in her nest on the Charles River in March 2021 suffered a fatal hemorrhage after consuming smaller animals who had themselves consumed rat poison, as confirmed by MassWildlife officials. This is the first confirmed case of such poisoning in Massachusetts and evokes a clarion call to reign in pesticides use in our Commonwealth.

According to information presented by Raptors Are the Solution (RATS):

  • Of the 161 dead raptors submitted to and tested at Tufts Wildlife Clinic in a study between 2006 and 2010, 86% had poison residues in their liver tissues.
  • For an additional 94 Massachusetts raptors necropsied from 2012 through 2017 at Tufts, 96% had detectable poisons
  • 9 Snowy Owls died from lethal levels of rodenticides while they were in Massachusetts over the winter of 2017/18 (from Mass Audubon)

The Charles River eagle was the victim of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticide (SGAR) poisoning. As explained by MassAudubon:

“Second-generation anticoagulants don’t kill rodents immediately. While these rodenticides can kill rats with a single dose (which is why many consumers prefer them), poisoned rats can still live for a few days and continue eating poisoned bait. This delay means that rats can ingest enough poison to kill a much larger animal by the time they finally succumb. While any rodenticide can kill a raptor, second-generation anticoagulants are the most dangerous.”

While personal use of these second-generation anticoagulants (SGARS) is already banned in MA, licensed pest companies can still use it when hired to deal with rodent problems.

This proposed legislation would do more than protect raptors like bald eagles. It could go a long way to helping us reduce pesticides use across the Commonwealth. 

The original rodenticide (2021) legislation was cosponsored by Animal Legal Defense Fund, The Humane Society of the United States – Massachusetts, Mass Audubon, MSPCA, New England Wildlife Center, NOFA/Mass and Raptors Are The Solution (RATS) and endorsed by The Center for Biological Diversity, MASSPIRG and the Massachusetts Sierra Club.

“An Act establishing an ecologically-based mosquito management program in the Commonwealth to protect public health”

S.547/H.985 filed by Senator Jo Comerford and Rep. Kathleen Lanatra.

Background

This legislation would replace the Commonwealth’s outdated and expensive mosquito management system with one that is more effective, affordable, transparent, ecologically responsible, and scientifically based. See/share our coalition fact sheet, here.

NOFA/Mass supports a scientifically based mosquito-borne disease management program to protect public health while minimizing environmental and public health risks associated with some forms of mosquito control. The existing programs for mosquito control in Massachusetts are antiquated and fragmented, and reform is needed.

Ecological mosquito management prioritizes preventative measures, and includes:

  • Monitoring and surveillance
  • A strong focus on public education and personal protective measures
  • Emphasis on eliminating breeding sites
  • Consideration of local ecology
  • A tiered approach to management:
  • Non-toxic approaches, such as habitat manipulation must be attempted first
  • Larvaciding should be conducted based on monitoring for predefined thresholds
  • Adulticiding (spraying for adult mosquitoes) should be permitted only during public health emergencies, when there is significant threat of mosquito-borne disease based on predefined thresholds, and all other, less toxic methods have been attempted and found ineffective

In coordination with numerous advocacy organizations, NOFA/Mass is asking the Commonwealth to:

  • Protect health and the environment by prioritizing public education, mosquito monitoring, and habitat modification, and only using pesticides when scientifically defined levels of disease carrying mosquitoes have been found in the area.
  • Increase funding and capacity for mosquito monitoring, surveillance, and public education efforts.
  • Provide full transparency and accountability within any mosquito borne disease management program, including publicly available notification around larviciding and adulticiding applications, and honoring local opt out agreements.
  • Prohibit aerial spraying of pesticides

Please see our coalition website for extensive resources on ecological mosquito control and more details on this proposed legislation: https://www.nofamass.dreamhosters.com/massquito/

“An Act empowering vulnerable municipalities to protect residents and the environment from harmful pesticides”

 H.954 filed by Representative Carmine Gentile.

Background

Prior to the passage of the Massachusetts Pesticide Control Act, M.G.L. 132B in 1978, Massachusetts municipalities had the right to restrict pesticides on all public and private land within their jurisdictions.

With pressure from the pesticide industry in the late 1970s, states across the country, including Massachusetts, passed legislation prohibiting cities and towns from adopting local pesticide ordinances more restrictive than state regulations. The Massachusetts Pesticide Board of the Department of Agricultural Resources currently decides which toxic pesticides are approved for use in Massachusetts (sold in local stores, used on lawns, gardens,playing fields, farms, etc.) and they rarely see a pesticide they don’t like.

Cities and towns have no say in which chemicals are used in their communities. 

Current legislation, “An Act empowering vulnerable municipalities to protect residents and the environment from harmful pesticides” would give local communities the power to make these important decisions once again. 

This bill would return power to communities to protect their families, food and water from harmful pesticide exposure. With the approval of a municipality’s Board of Health, a city or town government would be able to “restrict or prohibit the use and application or disposal of pesticides within the city or town that are more stringent than the standards and restrictions [adopted by the state].”

Fact sheet on state preemption of pesticides regulation, from Beyond Pesticides.

“An Act to protect pollinator habitat” – a priority of the Massachusetts Pollinator Network (MAPN)

S.628/H.981 filed by Rep. Mary Keefe and Sen. Jason Lewis.

Background

In Massachusetts, over 45% of agricultural commodities rely on pollinators, mainly wild and managed bees, for pollination.

Insect biomass and biodiversity are in decline globally, and pollinators are an especially vulnerable group. We have already seen a loss of pollinator diversity right here in New England.

The loss and degradation of natural habitat is a primary driver of pollinator declines around the globe, along with pesticide exposure, climate change, and disease.

This bill would:

  • Establish a commission to study statewide opportunities for improving pollinator health by increasing and enhancing native habitat
    • Includes both developed and natural areas, such as farm field borders, urban areas, and transportation corridors
  • Examine many issues relevant to pollinator health, including current laws and regulations, public awareness, funding, best management, practices, and the use of agricultural and non-agricultural lands

Find more details and talking points about the bill, here.

“An Act relative to maintaining adequate water supplies through effective drought management”

(S.586/H.1003) filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge and Rep. Joan Meschino

Background

The State’s 2023 ResilientMass plan lists drought as a major climate threat likely to have a “high” consequence to the natural environment, humans, and our economy. The 2016 drought caused economic losses of $18M for Massachusetts farmers due to crop failures. Also in 2016, local boards of health reported private well failures from 220 private residences and there were six public water supply emergency declarations. The ResilientMass plan also cites a higher risk of wildfires, invasive species, and reduced health of native species. This is a climate risk that impacts every corner of Massachusetts. The commonwealth has experienced droughts of varying intensity in 2016, 2020, 2022, 2024, and 2025.

An important goal of drought resilience is to sustain streamflow, groundwater levels, and water supplies for as long as possible when precipitation is scarce. The most effective, immediate, and least costly way to achieve this is to conserve water during a drought. Our current approach to drought management is a confusing patchwork of conservation measures that have limited impact. One municipality may impose stringent measures while its neighboring may require minimal water conservation, even though both withdraw water from the same struggling basin.

Currently, the state lacks the authority to require water conservation during a drought, until the Governor declares a drought emergency. The way we experience droughts is changing, so our response should be too. Rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns are increasing the length, frequency, and intensity of droughts. A new type of drought requires a new, more coordinated approach to management.

This bill would:

  • Give the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs the authority to require regional water conservation measures during a declared drought, yielding bigger water savings when our rivers and water supplies need it most. The bill would only affect nonessential outdoor watering, as recommended in the state’s 2023 Drought Management Plan. Water use for agriculture or business would be exempt. The bill would also make watering rules consistent and clearer for the public. 
  • Make outreach easier for municipalities by implementing more uniform conservation measures. They would benefit from message reinforcement by neighboring towns. Cities and towns could use the outreach materials that the state creates during every drought declaration, instead of having to create their own.
  • Exempt agricultural water users so they don’t have to compromise the value of their crops or livestock.

Learn more at Mass. Rivers Alliance

“An Act promoting equity in agriculture”

S.53/H.111 filed by Senator Jo Comerford and Rep. Natalie Blais.

Background

According to the 2017 USDA Census of Agriculture, BIPOC farmers are represented on only 2.3% of the Commonwealth’s farms, farms that steward just .3% of the land in farming and sell just .4% of the market value of agricultural goods in the Massachusetts, despite people of color making up 29% of the state’s population. These bills will establish a commission charged with studying and developing recommendations for supporting investments, policies, and practices designed to promote equity in agriculture for socially disadvantaged groups in the commonwealth that have been historically or systemically excluded or have had less access to resources and opportunities.

NOFA/Mass is supporting two bills related to Food Justice which were previously supported by the Mass Renews Alliance in 2021-22, a coalition of labor, youth, traditional environmentalist, and social and environmental justice organizations renewing Massachusetts’ commitment to racial, climate & economic justice. 

These Food Justice bills will bring more fresh local food to families in need and will create food-security jobs for people throughout Massachusetts, empowering communities to tailor solutions to their local needs.

“An Act relative to establishing a food justice frontline”

S.63/H.4423 filed by Sen. Patricia Jehlen and Rep. Vanna Howard.

This bill would create a food justice frontline program which provides funding to nonprofit organizations to hire individuals living in frontline, marginalized, and low-income communities for well-compensated food security jobs, offering efficient, effective solutions to meet local food security needs. A primary goal would be to increase the public awareness of the availability of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Healthy Incentives Program (HIP), and other similar food access programs for low-income and/or food insecure MA residents.

“An Act relative to food justice with jobs”

H.132 filed by Rep. Adrian C. Madaro.

This bill would create local and community garden agriculture programs within MDAR. The garden agriculture program would enable MA residents to establish small-scale food gardens, localize food production to reduce emissions created by buying food produced out of state, and increase MA residents’ access to locally-grown food with high nutritional value. The Community Agriculture Program created by this bill would enable MA residents to establish community gardens, as well as providing guidance for community agriculture cooperatives. This measure includes soil health in Community Agriculture Standards.

“An Act relative to pesticide applications”


S.666 filed by Sen. Bruce Tarr.

The current process for individuals to “opt out” of mosquito spraying is cumbersome and confusing. Private residents who wish to avoid being sprayed must submit an opt out request annually and to post signs saying “no spray” along their property border.

This bill seeks to create simple, alternative exclusion processes for residents from wide area pesticide applications by the state (such as by the Mosquito Control Board). Alternatives might include allowing residents to opt-out through their annual town or city census form.

Read more about mosquito spraying, opting out, and the need for reform on the MassQuito Coalition site, here.

“An Act protecting pollinators by eliminating harmful products” 

S.2746/H.1041 filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge and Rep Lindsay Sabadosa.

Background

A 2019 Scientific Literature Review performed by the Mass. Dept. of Agricultural Resources found that the broad majority of impact-based studies reviewed (42 of 43) cited neonicotinoid insecticides (“neonics”) as a contributor to pollinator declines. In response, the department subsequently decided to end consumer use of neonic products. However, the agricultural sectors use significantly higher volumes of these pollinator-killing pesticides. A recent study found that U.S. Agriculture is 48 times more toxic to insect life than it was in the early 1990s; neonicotinoids account for more than 90% of that increase.

This bill would prohibit the sale, distribution, or use of any agricultural seed for corn, wheat, or soybeans that have been treated with neonics, thus reducing the concentration of these toxins in the environment. MDAR may issue a waiver to allow the use of agricultural seeds treated with neonics only upon application by a person who has completed an integrated pest management training, conducted a pest risk assessment, and submitted to MDAR a pest risk assessment report. Waivers issued by MDAR would be public records and available online.

“An Act Governing the use of pesticides containing the herbicide substance Glyphosate in the commonwealth”

S.625/H.950 filed by Sen. Jason Lewis and Rep Carmine Gentile.

Background

This “probable human carcinogen” (as determined by the World Health Organization), is the world’s most commonly used herbicide. Recent studies have found glyphosate residues in lakes, rivers, rainwater, soil and in human urine.

A draft biological evaluation released on Nov. 25th, 2020, by the US Environmental Protection Agency concludes that glyphosate is likely to adversely affect 93% of threatened and endangered species. This bill, quite simply, would restrict the purchase and use of glyphosate-containing herbicides to licensed pesticide applicators and remove such products from retail stores.

Find our resource page on the human health risks associated with glyphosate.

“An Act relative to the use of glyphosate on public lands”

S.627 filed by Sen Jason Lewis.

This bill would end the application of glyphosate on any public lands owned or maintained by the Commonwealth without a special permit (and only when the a situation “poses an immediate threat to human health and the environment” and “there is no viable alternative to the use of the proposed glyphosate herbicide.” It would also outlaw the use of “any pesticide in a manner inconsistent with its label.”

“An Act relative to the pesticide board”

S.567 filed by Sen. Julian Cyr.

This bill would require the commissioner of food and agriculture to “consult and concur with the commissioner of environmental protection and commissioner of public health when rendering a decision… relative to the protection of groundwater sources of drinking water from pesticide contamination.”

Read about Pesticides in groundwater, from the USGS

“An Act relative to banning Chlorpyrifos in the Commonwealth”

H.962 filed by Rep. Kenneth Gordon.

Background

For half a century, staple food crops in the United States — such as corn, wheat, apples and citrus — have been sprayed with chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate pesticide that can permanently damage the developing brains of children, causing reduced IQ, loss of working memory, and attention deficit disorders. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s own scientific analysis (2016) showed that the amount of chlorpyrifos ingested by young children through sprayed fruits and vegetables could exceed safety levels by 140 times.

This bill would:

  • Prohibit the use of “chlorpyrifos or any products containing chlorpyrifos for use on agricultural land or crops within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts without (i) license issued by the State or any agency of the federal government to conduct chlorpyrifos research; or (ii) a permit issued by the State to apply chlorpyrifos because there is no viable alternative to the use.” 
  • Establish a “task force to study the impact of using chlorpyrifos in non-agricultural settings in Massachusetts.”

More on chlorpyrifos, from EarthJustice

“An Act relative to increased protection of wildlife management areas,” 

H.1048 filed by Rep. Danillo A. Sena.

Background

According to the original proposed legislation: On or before January 1, 2030, a minimum of 30% of all Wildlife Management Area lands, representative of all eco-regions in the state, would be designated as permanent Wildlife Management Area Nature Reserves to be monitored and maintained as nearly as possible as intact ecosystems in a natural condition for the purposes of biodiversity maintenance, nutrient cycling and soil formation, long‐term carbon sequestration, protection of late-successional and old growth forest habitats, and opportunities for wilderness recreation.

NOFA/Mass also endorses the Massachusetts legislative priorities of several in-state coalitions:

Mass. Food System Collaborative

The Massachusetts Food System Collaborative (MFSC) was created following the completion of the Massachusetts Local Food Action Plan in December 2015. The goals of the Collaborative are to promote, monitor, and facilitate implementation of the Plan. The Collaborative’s work focuses on the four main goals of the Plan:

  • Increase production, sales and consumption of Massachusetts-grown foods.
  • Create jobs and economic opportunity in food, farming and fishing, and improve the wages and skills of food system workers.
  • Protect the land and water needed to produce food, maximize environmental benefits from agriculture and fishing, and ensure food safety.
  • Reduce hunger and food insecurity, increase the availability of healthy food to all residents, and reduce food waste.

Learn more about The Collaborative, here.

Review The Collaborative’s complete legislative agenda, here.

Indigenous Legislative Agenda

The 2025-2026 Massachusetts Indigenous Legislative Agenda includes 5 priorities: Remove Racist Mascots, Honor Indigenous People’s Day, Celebrate and Teach Native American Culture & History, Protect Native American Heritage, and Support the Education and Futures of Native Youth.

Please urge your state legislators to co-sponsor these 5 important bills today!

CLICK HERE TO CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATORS IN SUPPORT OF THE MA INDIGENOUS LEGISLATIVE AGENDA

The Alliance for a Healthy Tomorrow (AHT) is a coalition of citizens, scientists, health professionals, workers, and educators seeking preventive action on toxic hazards.

Founded in 2004, AHT is coordinated by Clean Water Action/Clean Water Fund Massachusetts.

Our goal is to protect people from toxic chemicals.  We advocate for a precautionary approach, with chemicals tested before they are put in consumer products and released to the environment.  We fight for the elimination of toxic hazards known to harm health and the environment.

Learn more, here.

Act On Mass campaign

The Massachusetts State House is broken – in fact, it is one of the least transparent state houses in the country. Because our legislators are more accountable to the entrenched powers of House Leadership than their own constituents, we see bills with broad popular support get stuck in committees for years and ultimately die, session after session. Act on Mass, Sunrise Boston, Indivisible Mass and Mijente came together to launch The People’s House to build a movement to change that. 

We organized and built momentum in anticipation of key Rules debates in the House. In both the Joint Rules vote in February and the House Rules vote in July, House Leadership made a major concession in their proposal in direct response to the public pressure generated by the campaign. Because of our grassroots movement, “no” votes in Joint and House committees will be available online. This partial victory is a huge step towards a State House that is transparent, accessible, and accountable to the people. But there is more work to be done! Join us as we continue our campaign for a healthy democracy.

Read more about Act on Mass HERE.

Light pollution is one of the many ways we disrupt insect life to our own detriment. A new non-partisan bill being put forward in Massachusetts hopes to address how the state oversees outdoor lighting, and specifically blue light, in public spaces. The proposed changes, which include using fully shielded lighting fixtures for roadways and parking lots, could help reduce skyglow across the state.

NOFA/Mass strongly endorses H.3494/S.2243, An Act to improve outdoor lighting, conserve energy, and increase dark-sky visibility

Our survival depends on climate resilient food systems which in turn rely on healthy ecosystems. Ensuring the integrity of the natural cycling of darkness and sunlight is an important aspect of natural and agroecosystem function. Artificial light at night (ALAN) is a pervasive global change that strongly impacts insects and other wildlife.

In support of insect biodiversity and natural cycles, NOFA/Mass and the Massachusetts Pollinator Network have endorsed proposed legislation “An Act to Improve Outdoor Lighting, Conserve Energy, and Increase Dark-Sky Visibility” (H.3494 filed by Reps. Sean Garballey and Simon Cataldo and S.2243 filed by Sen. Cynthia Creem.

This bill would begin to address the problem of light pollution by ensuring that all publicly funded lighting going forward uses shielded lighting, lower brightness (lumens) and warmer colors (less harmful than blue lighting). The bill would also require the Mass. Dept. of Transportation to study alternatives to lighting roadways. Many countries in Europe already use reflectors on streets instead of lights, a change that dramatically reduces light pollution

Other Policy Resources

Glyphosate: A Closer Look At America’s Favorite Pesticide Glyphosate

MASSQuito Coalition – Advocating for effective, affordable, transparent, ecologically responsible, and scientifically-based mosquito disease management in Massachusetts.

Organic Standards – Find useful resources and educational materials about what organic really means and why it matters.

PFAS Resources Over the past few years, PFAS have emerged as a growing contaminant of concern for the food supply. Learn more about them here.

Policy and Advocacy Newsletter – Read about the latest policy issues affecting Massachusetts farmers and consumers in our monthly newsletter and receive time-sensitive alerts directly in your inbox.