HB 2516
In CommitteeHouse
Rodenticides
Placing a moratorium on the use of certain rodenticides.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill places a two-year moratorium on the use of anticoagulant rodenticides and bromethalin-based rodenticides in Washington starting in 2027, while requiring state agencies to study their impacts and alternatives. It also allows for limited emergency exceptions for public health or water protection.
- A moratorium on the use of anticoagulant rodenticides and rodenticides containing bromethalin begins on January 1, 2027, and ends on December 31, 2028.
- The Washington State Department of Agriculture must submit a list of all registered anticoagulant and bromethalin-based rodenticides to the legislature by December 31, 2026.
- The Washington State Academy of Sciences must conduct and submit a study on rodenticide impacts and alternatives—including non-toxic methods—by December 31, 2028.
- The Department of Agriculture may allow emergency, time-limited use of restricted rodenticides by qualified third parties to protect drinking water, control mosquito-borne disease, or respond to emergent infectious disease threats.
- All new provisions expire on June 30, 2029, unless extended by future legislation.
Who is affected
- Agricultural producers — Farmers, orchardists, and other agricultural producers who rely on rodenticides to protect crops and infrastructure from rodent damage.
- Pest control professionals and property owners — Property managers, pest control companies, and homeowners who use rodenticides for residential or commercial rodent control.
- Wildlife and conservation groups — Wildlife—including native birds of prey, mammals like foxes and bobcats—that may be harmed by secondary exposure to toxic rodenticides in the environment.
- Public health agencies — Public health agencies and mosquito control districts that may need emergency access to rodenticides to address disease outbreaks.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The moratorium will significantly reduce secondary poisoning of native wildlife—including raptors (e.g., owls, hawks), foxes, and bobcats—that feed on rodents exposed to anticoagulant or bromethalin rodenticides, supporting ecosystem resilience and biodiversity in Washington’s forests, farms, and urban edges.
EnvironmentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)Reducing widespread use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) will lower the risk of accidental human exposure—especially among children and pets—through direct contact with bait or contaminated surfaces, aligning with integrated pest management (IPM) principles to prioritize non-chemical solutions.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)The mandated study by the Washington State Academy of Sciences will generate publicly accessible, science-based information on rodenticide risks and alternatives—supporting informed decision-making by educators, extension programs, and community groups working on environmental health and pest management.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(d)By directing research into non-toxic rodent control methods—including contraceptives and behavioral tools—the bill may catalyze innovation in sustainable pest management, potentially creating new opportunities for local biotech firms, IPM consultants, and green infrastructure providers—though benefits will likely accrue disproportionately to firms with capacity to scale new solutions.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(c)Reducing environmental contamination from anticoagulant and bromethalin rodenticides may lower long-term public health burdens—particularly for communities near agricultural or urban interfaces—by decreasing exposure pathways linked to endocrine disruption, neurotoxicity, and secondary poisoning in pets.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)
Potential Concerns (5)
The two-year moratorium on anticoagulant and bromethalin rodenticides may disrupt pest control operations for agricultural producers and property managers, especially where alternative methods are less effective or unavailable—potentially increasing crop loss, property damage, or disease risk during the transition period.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)Emergency exceptions for rodenticide use are narrow and subject to agency discretion, which may delay or limit rapid response to rodent-borne disease outbreaks (e.g., hantavirus) or infrastructure threats (e.g., rodent-induced electrical failures), especially in rural or under-resourced jurisdictions without qualified third-party agents.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)Homeowners and small property managers may face increased difficulty and cost in managing rodent infestations during the moratorium, particularly in older housing stock where structural vulnerabilities increase exposure risk—though this burden is unevenly distributed and likely concentrated among low-income renters without access to integrated pest management services.
HousingLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(2)The requirement for the Washington State Academy of Sciences to study non-toxic alternatives does not mandate funding or implementation support, meaning adoption of safer methods may lag—especially for small-scale or rural operators lacking technical assistance or capital to invest in new technologies.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(c)Local governments may face increased costs or liability if rodent populations surge due to reduced control options—e.g., in public housing, parks, or waste management facilities—though the bill’s sunset clause and limited scope reduce long-term fiscal strain.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(2)
Who Is Most Affected
Agricultural producers may face short-term challenges in rodent control, especially in orchards and field crops where structural alternatives are costly; however, long-term reduction in rodenticide resistance and environmental contamination could improve sustainability and market access for export-oriented farms.
Pest control professionals may need to retrain staff and invest in non-toxic tools; while this raises operational costs for small firms, it may also open new revenue streams in IPM consulting and equipment sales—especially for firms already diversifying into eco-friendly services.
Wildlife—especially raptors and mesopredators—will benefit substantially from reduced secondary poisoning, supporting population recovery of threatened species like the northern spotted owl and Pacific fisher; conservation groups view this as a critical step toward ecosystem-level protection.
Public health agencies gain flexibility through emergency exceptions but may face coordination challenges in implementing time-limited, high-barrier use protocols; overall, the bill strengthens long-term public health by reducing chronic environmental exposure to toxicants.
Low-income households and renters may benefit from reduced pet and child exposure to rodenticides in multifamily housing, but could face higher pest-related health risks if landlords lack resources to adopt effective non-toxic alternatives.