PEER has been active throughout New England since 1994. New England PEER’s Director, Kyla Bennett, is also PEER’s Director of Science Policy. Kyla first became involved with PEER in the mid 1990s, when she became a whistleblower herself.
New England is comprised of six states (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island,) and yet is only 27% the size of Texas. From the beaches of Cape Cod to the peaks of the White Mountains, New England’s habitat and climate are diverse. Environmental issues in New England are as disparate as the geography, and include habitat loss, stormwater and point source pollution, air pollution, drinking water contamination, and climate change.
New England PEER represents municipal, state, and federal employees who are trying to protect the environment of the region. While New England has a reputation of being more protective of the environment than other regions of the country, all levels of government are politically susceptible, and employees often find themselves in trouble for upholding environmental laws and regulations. When politics trumps science and laws, employees turn to New England PEER to expose this dereliction of duty. New England PEER is also home to PEER’s Science Policy office, dealing with scientific attacks on EPA across the country.
From saving the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale from ship strikes and entanglements, to protecting drinking water from lead, PFAS, and other contaminants, New England PEER is helping hold back the tide of environmental rollbacks and regulatory decisions based on politics instead of science. With climate change increasingly impacting the quality and quantity of drinking water, flooding, and habitat loss, working with public employees who are on the front lines of the war on the environment is more important than ever.
P.O. Box 574
North Easton, MA 02356
Phone: 508-230-9933 Fax: 508-230-2110
NEWS FROM NEW ENGLAND
Impact of proposed Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) redefinition on wetlands and waters in New York: a case study
Why would Massachusetts spend millions to control and remove toxic PFAS from its waters, while at the same time let the EPA approve the discharge of massive amounts of PFAS into the Merrimack River?
Federal Officials Ignored Science to Benefit Fisheries
“Forever Chemical” Buildup in Food Chain Affects Game and Fish in Toxic Hotspots
Army to Give Both Immediate Relief and Long-Term Treatment for Hard-Hit Town
Bay State’s Widespread and Severe PFAS Levels Are Test for New EPA Action Plan