Back to Connecticut

SB00146 • 2026

AN ACT CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF CROPS AND LIVESTOCK FROM CERTAIN WILDLIFE.

AN ACT CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF CROPS AND LIVESTOCK FROM CERTAIN WILDLIFE.

Agriculture Energy Parental Rights
Passed Legislature

This bill passed both chambers and reached final enrollment, even if later executive action is not shown here.

Sponsor
Environment Committee
Last action
2026-03-19
Official status
File Number 72
Effective date
Not listed

Plain English Breakdown

The official text confirms nonlethal efforts are required for livestock, apiaries, and crops under the permit section; a summary note suggesting removal of this requirement for crops was corrected to match the bill text which maintains it.

Law to Protect Crops and Livestock from Wildlife

This law allows the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to issue permits for taking wildlife that damages crops, apiaries, or livestock if nonlethal methods fail, and it expands situations where people may use deadly force against bears.

What This Bill Does

  • Allows DEEP to issue permits for taking wildlife that threatens agricultural crops, apiaries, or livestock, provided the owner tried reasonable nonlethal efforts like electric fencing or animal guardians first.
  • Permits DEEP to approve taking wildlife if it caused crop damage in the previous growing season and this was verified by the department.
  • Allows people to use deadly force against a bear if they reasonably believe it is injuring or killing their controlled livestock, pets, inflicting great bodily harm on humans, or entering an occupied building.
  • Removes the requirement for notarizing permit applications for nuisance wildlife.

Who It Names or Affects

  • Owners or lessees of agricultural property with crops, apiaries, or livestock
  • The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP)
  • People who encounter bears threatening their pets, livestock, safety, or occupied buildings

Terms To Know

Taking wildlife
Killing or trapping animals as allowed by a permit.
Nonlethal efforts
Methods to protect property without killing the animal, such as electric fencing, guard animals, or fortified structures.
Apiaries
Places where bees are kept for honey production.

Limits and Unknowns

  • Permits cannot be used to take federally protected species.
  • The law does not specify the exact number of permits that will be issued each year.
  • Funding costs depend on how many applications are processed and actual violations occur.

Bill History

  1. 2026-03-19 LCO

    Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners' Office

  2. 2026-03-19 Connecticut General Assembly

    Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate

  3. 2026-03-19 Connecticut General Assembly

    Senate Calendar Number 72

  4. 2026-03-19 LCO

    File Number 72

  5. 2026-03-13 LCO

    Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 03/18/26 5:00 PM

  6. 2026-03-05 LCO

    Filed with Legislative Commissioners' Office

  7. 2026-03-04 ENV

    Joint Favorable Substitute

  8. 2026-02-13 Connecticut General Assembly

    Public Hearing 02/20

  9. 2026-02-11 Connecticut General Assembly

    Referred to Joint Committee on Environment

Official Summary Text

To authorize the taking of certain wildlife that injure or kill livestock or that caused crop damage in the preceding growing season.

Current Bill Text

Read the full stored bill text
Senate
sSB146 / File No. 72 1

General Assembly File No. 72
February Session, 2026 Substitute Senate Bill No. 146

Senate, March 19, 2026

The Committee on Environment reported through SEN. LOPES
of the 6th Dist., Chairperson of the Committee on the part of the
Senate, that the substitute bill ought to pass.

AN ACT CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF CROPS AND
LIVESTOCK FROM CERTAIN WILDLIFE.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General
Assembly convened:

Section 1. Subsection (e) of section 26 -47 of the general statutes is 1
repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from 2
passage): 3
(e) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, 4
the Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection may issue 5
permits for the taking of wildlife that threatens or causes damage to 6
agricultural crops, livestock or apiaries, or that caused damage to crops 7
during the preceding growing season, as verified by the Department of 8
Energy and Environmental Protection if: (1) The owner or lessee of the 9
subject property utilized reasonable nonlethal efforts to protect such 10
[crops,] apiaries or livestock, including, but not limited to, electric 11
fencing, animal guardians or fortified enclosed structures, and (2) an 12
investigation by Department of Energy and Environmental Protection 13
personnel determines that the taking of such wildlife is necessary to 14
sSB146 File No. 72

sSB146 / File No. 72 2

protect agricultural crops, apiaries or livestock from excessive damage 15
and that reasonable nonlethal efforts to protect such [crops,] apiaries or 16
livestock have not been or are not likely to be successful in preventing 17
further damage. Any such permit issued pursuant to this subsection 18
shall specify the means, methods and times for which such take is 19
allowed and shall only be issued by the commissioner to the: (A) Owner 20
of the subject property on which such excessive damage occurred, (B) 21
agent of such owner, or (C) lessee of such subject property, provided 22
such lessee has the written permission of such owner to take wildlife. 23
No application for a permit pursuant to this section shall require 24
notarization. Any wildlife taken pursuant to this section shall be 25
disposed of as directed by the department. The provisions of this 26
subsection shall not be construed to authorize the taking of any federally 27
protected species. 28
Sec. 2. Subsection (c) of section 26 -80a of the general statutes is 29
repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof ( Effective from 30
passage): 31
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any person 32
from using deadly physical force to kill a bear if such person reasonably 33
believes that a bear is: (1) Inflicting or is about to inflict great bodily 34
harm to a human, (2) injuring or killing such person's pet or livestock 35
that is otherwise controlled in accordance with any applicable provision 36
of the general statutes or any regulation adopted pursuant to such a 37
provision, or (3) entering a building occupied by persons. 38
This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following
sections:

Section 1 from passage 26-47(e)
Sec. 2 from passage 26-80a(c)

ENV Joint Favorable Subst.

sSB146 File No. 72

sSB146 / File No. 72 3

The following Fiscal Impact Statement and Bill Analysis are prepared for the benefit of the members of
the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and explanation and do not
represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose. In general,
fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst’s professional
knowledge. Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final
products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.

OFA Fiscal Note

State Impact:
Agency Affected Fund-Effect FY 27 $ FY 28 $
Department of Energy and
Environmental Protection
GF - Cost 32,500 32,500
State Comptroller - Fringe
Benefits1
GF - Cost 13,231 13,231
Resources of the General Fund GF - Revenue
Gain
Minimal Minimal
Judicial Dept. (Probation) GF - Potential
Savings
Minimal Minimal
Resources of the General Fund GF - Potential
Revenue Loss
Minimal Minimal
Note: GF=General Fund
Municipal Impact: None
Explanation
The bill expands and revises the use of deadly physical force to kill a
bear. The bill results in a cost to the Department of Energy and
Environmental Protection (DEEP) associated with monitoring crop
damage, issuing additional permits, and disposing of wildlife. DEEP
will require a part -time Environmental Conservation Officer, with a
salary of $32,500 and corresponding fringe benefits of $13,231 (for a total
of $45,721) annually, beginning in FY 27. Also, there is a minimal
revenue increase to the resources of the General Fund associated with
issuing additional permits. It is anticipated the revenue increase will be
minimal.

1The fringe benefit costs for most state employees are budgeted centrally in accounts
administered by the Comptroller. The estimated active employee fringe benefit cost
associated with most personnel changes is 41.82% of payroll in FY 27.
sSB146 File No. 72

sSB146 / File No. 72 4

The bill also expands the circumstances in which a person may exert
lethal force over wildlife resulting in a potential savings to the Judicial
Department for probation and a potential revenue loss to the General
Fund from fines.2 On average, the marginal cost for supervision in the
community is less than $6003 each year for adults and $450 each year for
juveniles.
The Out Years
The annualized ongoing fiscal impact identified above would
continue into the future subject to inflation , number of permits, and
actual violations.

2 From FY 20 - FY 25, 14 charges were recorded and $250 in associated revenue was
collected under CGS § 26-80a.
3 Probation marginal cost is based on services provided by private providers and only
includes costs that increase with each additional participant.
sSB146 File No. 72

sSB146 / File No. 72 5

OLR Bill Analysis
sSB 146

AN ACT CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF CROPS AND
LIVESTOCK FROM CERTAIN WILDLIFE.

SUMMARY
This bill allows a person to use deadly physical force to kill a bear if
they reasonably believe the bear is injuring or killing their controlled
livestock. The law already allows people to kill bears when they
reasonably believe the bear is (1) inflicting , or about to inflict, great
bodily harm to a person; (2) injuring or killing their controlled pet; or (3)
entering an occupied building.
The bill also revises the conditions under which the Department of
Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) commissioner may issue
a permit to take (e.g., kill or trap) certain nuisance wildlife that threatens
or damages agricultural crops. Under current law, to get a permit, the
property owner or lessee must have tried reasonable nonlethal efforts
(e.g., electric fencing, animal guardians, or fortified structures) that
failed to prevent damage. The bill removes the requirement that the
owner or lessee try reasonable nonlethal efforts to protect crops. The bill
also allows DEEP to issue permits for the taking of nuisance wildlife if
the wildlife caused damage to agricultural crops during the previous
growing season, as verified by DEEP. As under existing law, DEEP must
specify in the permit the means, methods, and times for taking the
nuisance wildlife, and the permit cannot allow for the taking of deer or
a federally protected species.
By law, anyone who violates the conditions of a permit is guilty of a
class D misdemeanor (up to 30 days in prison, up to a $250 fine, or both).
The DEEP commissioner must also revoke the permit, as well as all other
permits or licenses relating to the property. The permit is suspended for
a period of time set by the commissioner.
sSB146 File No. 72

sSB146 / File No. 72 6

Lastly, the bill prohibits DEEP’s nuisance wildlife permit applications
from requiring notarization.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon passage
COMMITTEE ACTION
Environment Committee
Joint Favorable Substitute
Yea 25 Nay 8 (03/04/2026)