Legislative Trends for Mosquito Control in the United States

May 12, 2025 | Courtney Anderson, Lillian Colasurdo

Over the last 20 years, mosquito-borne disease outbreaks and epidemics have increased in the United States in both frequency and scale. In just the last decade, public health has battled Zika and chikungunya epidemics and continues to fight the current dengue outbreak in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the current explosive rise in Oropouche infections in Central and South America.

In the continental U.S., mosquito-borne viruses that affect humans include eastern equine encephalitis (EEE), St. Louis encephalitis, and West Nile virus. In recent years, increased outbreaks of EEE in the northeastern United States have resulted in more deaths. Consequently, efforts to prevent outbreaks and epidemics are as important as ever. It is imperative for public health officials to understand public health interventions before an outbreak occurs as well as the laws and policies that authorize mosquito control.

U.S. states, territories, and freely associated states play critical roles in controlling mosquito populations and preventing mosquito-borne diseases. Specific responsibilities and activities can include mosquito surveillance and testing, infectious disease monitoring, developing, and disseminating public education information about mosquito bite prevention, and coordinating and participating in mosquito control activities. The legal authority for mosquito control efforts, such as surveillance and abatement, is derived from state, county, and municipal laws. This legal authority can be general, such as a health official’s general legal authority to protect the public’s health, welfare, and safety. Some jurisdictions may include statutory authority to abate or stop a public or environmental nuisance. There can also be more specific statutory or regulatory authority over mosquito control. For example:

• Statutory Authority to Establish and Operate a Mosquito Control Program
• Statutory Authority to Establish Mosquito Control Districts
• Statutory Mosquito Control Program with Options for Participation by County and Municipal Governments

State and local regulations, interjurisdictional agreements, and other legal mechanisms may also form the basis for mosquito control programs. While authority is most commonly established in state law, mosquito control strategies generally occur at the local level.

Current Proposed Legislation to Control Mosquitoes

The New Jersey legislature introduced a bill in 2024 to develop more comprehensive coverage statewide and coordinate county-led efforts at mosquito control. S 170 would require the State Mosquito Control Commission to develop guidelines to assist county mosquito commissioners in control and extermination activities, including use of larvicides or adulticides. The bill would also require any counties that have not previously established a “county mosquito control commission” to do so within one year of the bill’s passage, and. would mandate the reporting of certain mosquito control activities to the State Mosquito Control Commission.

Illinois currently has a Vector Control Act. The Illinois legislature introduced HB 2725 to take a more data-driven approach to mosquito control. This bill would define “integrated vector management approach” and require that any organization performing mosquito control as a public service must submit a written integrated vector management plan to the Department of Public Health. Department grantees or businesses or individuals already regulated by the Structural Pest Control Act would be exempt from this requirement. These written plans must account for “the prevention and biological and nonchemical control of disease vectors based upon scientific data prescribed by the Department.”

Massachusetts has introduced companion bills H 985 and S 547, which would both establish a Mosquito Management Board to oversee disease vector mosquito management for the state. The board would also be responsible for creating a mosquito-borne disease management plan which must be ecologically sustainable, with an emphasis on preventative measures and source reduction for mosquitoes. Both bills would prohibit the aerial application of any adulticide and the use of any adulticide or larvicide that contains PFAS.

Additionally, Massachusetts has introduced S 1527, which would grant that state authority to use preventative, management, and eradication methods for mosquito control if the Commissioner of Public Health determines there is an elevated risk of a mosquito-borne virus in the current or following year. The bill establishes notice and publication requirements prior to any control measures taken and directs the state to develop a process for municipalities and agricultural entities who have approved alternative mosquito management plans to opt out of aerial spraying. It also requires an application process for private property owners to opt out of aerial spraying on their property.

Similarly in Hawaii, the legislature is attempting to clarify or reaffirm the state’s broad authority to protect the public’s health. HB 1120 / SB 1439 are examples of general public health authority used to control mosquito-borne diseases. These companion bills would amend existing law to establish the department of health’s authority to prevent, abate, destroy, and remove environmental nuisances or conditions that might cause an environmental nuisance which threatens the public’s health. The legislature received testimony specific to standing water as an environmental nuisance where mosquito larvae exist and might pose a threat to the public’s health.

In Florida, which has comprehensive local mosquito control districts, the legislature has proposed a bill that would merge smaller local mosquito control districts into a county mosquito control district (HB 4035) and bills (HB 651 / SB 700) that would include municipalities, as opposed to only cities, in mosquito control programs and increase the amount of non-matching funding counties and districts are allowed to receive for new mosquito control programs.

Conclusion

The structure of mosquito control efforts varies amongst the states and territories, as do authority and enforcement provisions and funding mechanisms. Understanding a jurisdiction’s legal authority for mosquito control allows public health officials to recognize potential gaps in that authority, allowing them to better direct efforts in both the prevention and response of mosquito-borne disease outbreaks.

ASTHO will continue monitoring developments in mosquito control legislation and policy.