CT Senate advances partial ban on ‘neonics,’ other pesticides
Shahrzad Rasekh / CT Mirror
Sens. Needleman, Looney, Kissel, and Lopes chat during a break as the Senate discusses potential legislation banning certain pesticides and rodenticides on May 15, 2025.
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.
“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.
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments