Birds in Connecticut are at risk from the use of a common class of insecticide, according to the Connecticut Audubon Society’s annual “State of the Birds” report.
The group said neonicotinoids, or neonics, are injuring and killing birds directly while also decimating insect populations, a major food source for birds.
“When we’re losing our insect populations, we’re losing our bird populations,” said Milan Bull, senior director of science and conservation at the Connecticut Audubon Society, in a video presentation. “Lots of our birds – red-winged blackbirds, barn swallows, chimney swifts, bluebirds and robins – are all common Connecticut birds that are being impacted by pesticides including neonics.”
In the last 50 years, North America saw a decline of nearly 30% in its bird population. There are 3 billion fewer birds in the region now than there were in 1970, data showed.
“We know that there's been a major decline of songbirds over the past 50 years, and, in part, insecticides play a role in this,” said Joyce Leiz, executive director, Connecticut Audubon Society. “So we really want to make sure that we take a more proactive stance on this, and we don't wait until the birds are at the point of complete extinction.”
“We definitely don't want to wake up in 15 or 20 years and say we knew this was coming and we didn't do anything,” Leiz said.
Neonics are used in common pesticides applied to lawns, golf courses and agricultural crops in Connecticut. They’re also used to coat seeds before planting. The report said they are “significantly more toxic than [dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane] DDT,” the pesticide banned in the 1970s for its devastating impact on wildlife.
The society said that in the last decade, Connecticut was a leader in laws regulating pesticides, but the state has since fallen behind peer states like New York and Vermont.
Conservationists at the society are calling on the Connecticut General Assembly to pass legislation during its upcoming session Jan. 8, aimed at reducing the use of neonics in landscaping and agriculture.
“We're not pushing necessarily for a full ban on it,” Leiz said. “What we are asking for are more controls and monitoring, and for a reason for it – not for these chemicals to be used prophylactically, but being used when we know that there actually is a pest on the property and a risk to our crops and our environments.”
“We want Connecticut to remain an environmental legislative leader,” Leiz said. “That's why we love Connecticut so much.”
