 (1).png)
Help Strengthen Bill To Prohibit Pesticides from Undermining Ecosystem and Public Health in Connecticut
Help support a legislative effort in Connecticut to adopt state law that ensures the adoption of ecological practices protective of health and the environment and moving beyond reliance on toxic pesticides. To accomplish this, it is vital to support SB 9 with amendments ensuring that effective pest management practices do not rely on toxic chemicals, which are hazardous to people and the environment.
>> Tell your state Representative to support SB 9 to protect biodiversity and public health! [Inactive].
On the matter of neonicotinoid insecticides, it is crucial that pesticide products, for both agricultural and non-agricultural use, and treated seeds should be prohibited. A landmark report, Neonicotinoids in Connecticut Waters: Surface Water, Groundwater, and Threats to Aquatic Ecosystems, published by researchers at the University of Connecticut in late 2024, found "that 46% of Connecticut waterway samples are contaminated with levels of the neonicotinoid insecticide, imidacloprid—one of the most widely used insecticides in the United States on lawn and golf courses.” The same researchers acknowledged early in the report on the “abandonment” of Integrated Pest Management in "the use of neonicotinoids has coincided with and been implicated in the decline of many non-target species of insects, in particular pollinators such as bees... and monarch butterflies.” (See Daily News analysis here.) Neonics have also been found to adversely impact birds, mammals, and human health, including nervous system effects, liver damage, among others.
On the issue of rodenticides, the bioaccumulative effect of first-generation and second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, as well as non-anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs), has led to increased resistance and subsequent nontarget poisoning of wildlife and pets alike. The high toxicity and persistence of SGARs in animal tissue, as identified by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Pesticide Regulation, have led to disproportionate impacts on wildlife such as birds of prey and raptors that may hunt rodents and small mammals that contain trace residues of high-risk chemicals such as brodifacoum. Non-anticoagulants have different modes of action, which correspond with a variety of adverse health effects on wildlife, including rapid onset of seizures, muscle tremors, limb weakness, ataxia, neurologic signs, respiratory paralysis, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and lethargy. Unlike anticoagulants, non-anticoagulants have no antidote, and the treatment is spotty, as symptoms often return.
Connecticut has historically been at the forefront of protecting public health and biodiversity through common-sense pesticide reforms. Connecticut was the first state in the nation to prohibit synthetic pesticides in elementary and middle schools, as well as public playgrounds, as of 2015. Mosquito misters, which pose unique dangers to human health due to inhalation and dermal absorption of the fine pesticide mist and the resulting chemical drift, were banned in Connecticut in 2018.
It is critical that "safe" pest management is grounded in sound science in order for people and their communities to develop effective strategies while curtailing the widespread broadcasting of toxic chemicals with nontarget exposure. The goal of the legislation must be to avoid the use of toxic chemicals and encourage the transition to non-chemical alternatives, including organically managed land.
>> Tell your state Representative to support SB 9 to protect biodiversity and public health! [Inactive].
The targets for this Action are state Representatives in the state legislature of Connecticut.
Thank you for your active participation and engagement! The Action is a multi-step process, so please click submit below to proceed to step two, where you will be able to personalize comments before final submission. The comment maximum limit is 4,000 characters, so it may be necessary to delete some of our prepared message text if editing.
↪️ For more information, please see the latest written testimony and analysis on rodenticides here and neonicotinoids here.
Sample Letter for CT House [Original text from May 23, 2025]
Please amend SB 9, an Act concerning the environment, climate, and sustainable municipal and state planning, and the use of neonicotinoids and second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides. Connecticut has historically been at the forefront of protecting public health and biodiversity through common-sense pesticide reforms, proudly serving as the first state in the nation to prohibit synthetic pesticides in elementary and middle schools, as well as public playgrounds, as of 2015. Mosquito misters, which pose unique dangers to human health due to inhalation and dermal absorption of the fine pesticide mist and the resulting chemical drift, were also banned in 2018.
In the bill’s current form, there are two main areas that need to be strengthened.
Neonicotinoids—Pesticide products (for both agricultural and non-agricultural use) and treated seeds with neonicotinoids should be prohibited from further use in the state. A landmark report, Neonicotinoids in Connecticut Waters: Surface Water, Groundwater, and Threats to Aquatic Ecosystems, published by researchers at the University of Connecticut in late 2024, found "that 46% of Connecticut waterway samples are contaminated with levels of the neonicotinoid insecticide, imidacloprid—one of the most widely used insecticides in the United States on lawn and golf courses.” The same researchers acknowledged early in the report on the “abandonment” of Integrated Pest Management in "the use of neonicotinoids has coincided with and been implicated in the decline of many non-target species of insects, in particular pollinators such as bees... and monarch butterflies.” Neonics have also been found to adversely affect the health of birds, mammals, and humans.
Rodenticides—The bioaccumulative effect of first-generation and second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs), as well as non-anticoagulant rodenticides, has led to increased resistance and subsequent nontarget poisoning by wildlife and pets alike. The high toxicity and persistence of SGARs in animal tissue, as identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have led to disproportionate impacts on wildlife, such as birds of prey and raptors that may hunt rodents and small mammals that contain trace residues of high-risk chemicals such as brodifacoum. Non-anticoagulants have different modes of action, which correspond with a variety of adverse health effects on wildlife, including rapid onset of seizures, muscle tremors, limb weakness, ataxia, neurologic signs, respiratory paralysis, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and lethargy. Unlike anticoagulants, non-anticoagulants have no antidote, and the treatment is spotty, as symptoms often return.
While I support the elimination of outdoor uses of neonicotinoids and uses of anticoagulant rodenticides, I would like to emphasize that these chemicals are merely the “poster children” for broader problems associated with EPA’s evaluation and registration of pesticides. At a time of cascading and intersecting public health, biodiversity, and climate crises, we must stop the use of chemical classes causing immense harm; yet, we must also move toward an approach that incentivizes defined, sustainable practices like organic that do not necessitate these chemicals in the first place.
For further background on neonicotinoids and rodenticides from Beyond Pesticides, see here. (https://bp-dc.org/bp-statement-ct-hb6916) (https://bp-dc.org/epm-vermont-2025)
Thank you again for your leadership in protecting environmental and public health in the state of Connecticut. I hope that you keep in mind the spirit of the state’s history in leading on chemical safety and children's health in considering this legislation and our suggested amendments.