Marlborough committee advances draft ordinance banning second‑generation anticoagulant rodenticides on city property

The Legislative & Legal Affairs Committee reviewed a proposed ordinance March 31 that would add a new article to Marlborough’s Code of Ordinances (Chapter 2.50, Animals) prohibiting the use of second‑generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) on city property.

Councilor Preciado introduced the proposal and said the Board of Health Director Dinwiddie and Conservation Commissioner Priscilla Ryder support the ordinance with an amendment deleting a section that would have permitted emergency waivers for SGAR use on city property.

Alyssa Giacinto, a Marlborough wildlife rehabilitator representing Giacinto Wildlife and Rehabilitation Center, presented the harms she attributes to SGARs in wildlife. She described how second‑generation anticoagulants are formulated to deliver a lethal dose after a single feeding and said predators that eat poisoned rodents can accumulate multiple lethal doses. “When that rodent finally dies, it’s containing six to seven times the lethal dose of poison needed to kill that rodent,” Giacinto said during her presentation.

Giacinto showed local case examples provided to the committee, including raptors and mammals brought into care with bleeding disorders consistent with anticoagulant exposure. She and supporters recommended nonchemical alternatives such as sanitation, secured dumpsters, snap or contained traps, rodent contraception products, and targeted CO2 treatments.

Board of Health Director Dinwiddie, speaking to the committee, noted that passage of a city‑property ban would not prevent private retail sales or private use but would serve as an awareness and risk‑reduction measure. Dinwiddie and others urged the committee to adopt the Board of Health’s recommended deletion of the emergency‑waiver clause so the ban would be stricter on city property.

Committee members asked whether the city currently uses SGARs. The record shows the mayor indicated the city had stopped using SGAR-containing bait boxes at city facilities after the owl incident referenced in the presentation.

After discussion, a motion to approve the ordinance as amended (removing the emergency‑waiver clause and making clerical adjustments) was moved and seconded. Committee members asked the solicitor to prepare the ordinance in proper legal form and requested a suspension so the matter could be presented at the next full City Council meeting. The committee did not record a final adopted ordinance in committee; the draft was ordered to be sent to the solicitor and scheduled for full council consideration pending proper form and suspension votes.

Committee members voiced support for additional public education and suggested the city promote alternatives to SGARs on the city website and via social media.