Latest news with #RickLopes
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A proposal on hunting black bears in CT moved forward. Here's what it says.
After years of unsuccessful attempts to allow black bear hunting in the state, a revised bill has cleared a key hurdle with state lawmakers, possibly making hunting the animals one step closer to reality. The amended bill, SB 1523, which the Senate passed and sent to the House on a 34-2 vote this month, allows the governor to direct the commissioner of the Department of Energy and Environment Protection to adopt regulations and set parameters to permit a bear hunt in the state. But according to the bill's language, a hunt may only be allowed only after the governor and DEEP's commissioner find through an assessment by DEEP that 'bear conflicts with people, pets, and livestock in Connecticut have reached a level that poses a public safety threat.' The bill, which has been added to the state House calendar for a possible vote, would make it lawful to use deadly force to kill a bear if the animal were injuring or killing controlled livestock. The new bill would add to a law passed in 2023 that authorizes certain circumstances to use lethal force against bears and for special hunting permits when a bear is found to be damaging crops. Under Connecticut law, you can kill a bear in self-defense if you reasonably believe it's about to cause serious harm to you or someone else, or if it's entering a building with people inside, according to officials with the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. In addition, a bear may be killed if it is injuring or killing one's pet. But if a bear were shot and killed, it must be reported to DEEP, and law enforcement would investigate each case. But a provision added to the bill by state Sen. Rick Lopes, a New Britain Democrat who co-chairs the Environment Committee, and Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield, now reopens the possibility of a black bear hunting season. If passed, the bill would give the state DEEP the authority to conduct an assessment and prepare it for the governor. According to the provision, the assessment 'must consider factors like bear entries into occupied buildings and bear attacks on people, pets, and livestock.' According to online records, the House had not acted on the bill as of May 26. DEEP Commissioner Katie Dykes told lawmakers in testimony the state agency supports a regulated bear hunt. She said that the bear population has exploded over the past 10 years and that human-bear interactions have increased, leading to a statewide public safety hazard. Connecticut is the only state in New England that prohibits the hunting of black bears, the commissioner said in her testimony on the bill. Why a lawmaker is pushing state to allow bear hunting. CT agency supports 'limited' season. 'Because the frequency and severity of human-bear conflicts have increased significantly over the past decade, DEEP supports this legislation as we believe a regulated bear hunt is a critical and needed addition to the suite of black bear management tools we currently employ to protect the public, reduce human-bear conflicts, and support a healthy and sustainable black bear population,' Dykes said. 'DEEP supports a regulated harvest for two primary reasons: Human-bear conflicts have escalated in frequency and severity over the past decade resulting in elevated risk to the public, and this trend is likely to continue and to affect more Connecticut communities as bear populations increase and expand their range. Non-lethal bear management strategies, such as DEEP's significant investments in public education and outreach, have failed to decrease human-bear conflicts,' she said. The provision comes amid a rise in conflicts between humans and bears, as the number of bear sightings reached 159 out of the state's 169 towns and cities, according to the 2025 'The State of the Bears,' an annual DEEP publication that tracks their growth. Thousands of conflicts between humans and black bears are reported each year and are increasing, according to DEEP. Reports of bears entering or breaking into homes occurred 67 times in 16 different municipalities statewide in 2024. While the majority of human and bear conflicts are in the northwest corner, the agency said they are seeing more conflicts in other parts of the state, including Hartford and Fairfield counties. In 2015, there were less than 10 reports of bears entering or breaking into homes. The yearly report, which was released in March, comes amid renewed interest in a black bear hunting season. DEEP officials said the black bear population remains stable, with between 1,000 and 1,200 bears, and has a high potential for growth due to 'an abundance of suitable habitat and excessive human-related food across their range.' Hunting an fishing contribute to the state's economy, according to many sources. But critics of a black bear hunt say that it is unnecessary and cruel. More than a dozen animal rights groups and environmental advocacy organizations submitted testimony to oppose a bear hunt. Critics argue bears that break into homes or become violent are often in residential areas where hunting is already prohibited. Further, they contend, hunting bears in their natural environment will not help resolve human-bear interactions. 'Hunting bears is unnecessary, inhumane, and will not solve the concerns about human-bear interactions,' said Samantha Dynowksi, state director for the Sierra Club, in testimony. 'There is much evidence that a bear hunt will not work to decrease human-bear interactions.' 'The bear that is being killed deep in the woods where hunting occurs is very unlikely to be the same bear in the neighborhood or near houses. People would be unable to hunt a bear near neighborhoods and residential areas as it is extremely dangerous. It is counterproductive to kill bears in their natural habitat exhibiting normal behaviors and teaching their cubs to do the same,' she said. Stephen Underwood can be reached at sunderwood@
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
CT lawmakers advance partial pesticide ban, allow exemption for ‘new DDT' blamed for killing birds
A partial ban on rat poisons and other pesticides used in lawn care was advanced by the Connecticut Senate on Thursday, but only after the bill's sponsors agreed to several changes sought by the pest control industry. The legislation, Senate Bill 9, is the upper chamber's preeminent environmental measure for the 2025 legislative session. In addition to curbing pesticides, the bill would order an update to the state's water plan, require towns to consider sea level rise when making zoning changes and mandate flood risk disclosures for home buyers and renters, among other provisions. Most of the attention, however, has focused on two provisions dealing with pest controls — specifically the use of certain long-acting rodenticides and a class of insecticides called neonicotinoids — which critics have spent years lobbying to ban in Connecticut. While the bill would impose significantly greater restrictions on both of those chemicals, lawmakers passed an amendment on the Senate floor Thursday that offered some exemptions for the use of neonicotinoids — commonly referred to as 'neonics' — and delayed other restrictions on their use until 2027. 'The industry's biggest concern is they said they were willing to help… if you give us a little time to acclimate and change our systems, we will be on board with this,' said Sen. Rick Lopes, D-New Britain, co-chair of the Environment Committee. 'That's the deal we cut with them.' Still, the deal rankled environmental advocates, who have labeled neonicotinoids 'the new DDT' due to their potential to harm birds, pollinators and other wildlife. The Connecticut Audubon Society sent an email to its members prior to Thursday's vote opposing the changes and urging lawmakers to restore the stricter language. Debate on the bill was briefly delayed as Democrats huddled to discuss some members' concern with the new language. One of those in the huddle, state Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, was Lopes' predecessor as chair of the Environment Committee and had worked on several previous and unsuccessful efforts to ban neonicotinoids and rodenticides. Pesticide called 'new DDT' has been found in CT waterways. Here's what it kills. 'I've been on that side of the negotiations, and I know how difficult it can be,' Cohen said afterwards. 'So despite my disappointment at not getting a full ban in both instances, I can appreciate their work, and I'm glad we're at least moving in the right direction.' Representatives of the Connecticut Pest Control Association and other industry groups did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the revised legislation Thursday. The legislation passed the Senate by vote of 28 to 8 after less than an hour of debate. It now heads to the House for further consideration. Formal opposition to the bill came from a handful of Republicans, whose concerns focused on the bill's partial ban on certain rat poisons that would limit their use to professionals certified by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. Those restrictions are due to take effect on Jan. 1, 2026. Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield, said he was worried some residents 'would be forced to live with infestations of pests,' if they are unable to afford to hire a licensed specialist. During Thursday's debate, Lopes also objected to the characterization of the bill made by some of the supporters of stricter regulations. Lopes said he was asked by the pest control industry to include another carveout in the bill that would have allowed the application of pesticides on elementary school grounds. When he broached the idea with environmental groups, their objections prompted him to abandon the plan. But rumors continued to swirl about its inclusion in the final draft of the bill, he said. 'It was discussed briefly and then discarded,' Lopes said. 'It has never been a part of the bill, it was just an idea at one point.' Lopes said he did agree to include an exemption allowing for the application of neonicotinoids on shrubbery and other ornamental plants at the request of the industry. The bill would still ban the use of the pesticides on lawns and golf courses, which he said accounted for the majority of current applications in Connecticut. 'We targeted, like we target for emissions sometimes, the largest and worst-damaging aspect of the chemical,' Lopes said. 'That should significantly decrease the amount of neonics exposed into our environment.' Critics of the pesticides, however, said it made little sense to ban their use on grass while allowing it on other plants nearby that serve as natural habitats to birds, butterflies, bees and other species. 'It's problematic because that's where most of the blooms are, and the berries for the birds and the pollinators,' said Louise Washer, a Connecticut-based advocate with Pollinator Pathways. 'On turf grass, there's usually not as many flowering plants, so it's not as attractive.' Washer and other advocates said that while they were upset about the new exemptions, they still supported the overall bill and urged its passage in the House. Lopes said that the bill, including its climate provisions, is intended to run in tandem with House Bill 5004 as part of broader and long-awaited effort to bolster the state's preparedness for climate change. The House bill, which was approved by members of that chamber earlier this month, is intended to set Connecticut on a path toward achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. John Moritz is a reporter for the Connecticut Mirror. Copyright 2025 @ CT Mirror (
