Historical Connecticut environmental information, 1971-2016

---

This article does not contain the most recently published data on this subject. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.

---

State environmental policy
U.S. environmental policy
Endangered species policy
State endangered species
Federal land policy
Environmental terms

The historical environmental information below applies to prior years. For more current information regarding environmental policy in Connecticut, see this article.

Land ownership

See also: Federal land policy and Federal land ownership by state

The federal government owned between 635 million and 640 million acres of land in 2012 (about 28 percent) of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Around 52 percent of federally owned acres were in 12 Western states—including Alaska, 61 percent of which was federally owned. In contrast, the federal government owned 4 percent of land in the other 38 states. Federal land policy is designed to manage minerals, oil and gas resources, timber, wildlife and fish, and other natural resources found on federal land. Land management policies are highly debated for their economic, environmental and social impacts. Additionally, the size of the federal estate and the acquisition of more federal land are major issues.

Connecticut is located in the northeastern United States, and as such is considered to be part of the New England region. New England states are typically smaller in total land acreage than Midwestern and Western states, and fewer acres in New England states are owned by the federal government. According to the Congressional Research Service, Connecticut has a total acreage of 3.1 million acres. Of that total, 0.3 percent, or 8,557 acres, belong to the federal government. From 1990 to 2010, the federal government increased its ownership of land in Connecticut by 1,774 acres. The federal government owns between 635-640 million acres nationwide, or 28 percent of the estimated 2.27 billion acres in the nation. 3.126 million acres in Connecticut are not owned by the federal government, which works out to an average of 0.86 acres per capita for the state's 3.596 million residents.

The following table shows federal land ownership in Connecticut compared to two western states, as a comparison. While Nevada and Utah have millions of acres owned by the U.S. Forest Service, the service only owns 24 acres in Connecticut. While the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) owns millions of acres in Nevada and hundreds of thousands in Utah, the BLM does not own any land in Connecticut.

Federal land ownership in Connecticut and other states by agency
State
Agency	Connecticut		Nevada		Utah
	Acres owned	Percentage owned	Acres owned	Percentage owned	Acres owned	Percentage owned
U.S. Forest Service	24	0.28%	5,764,262	10.12%	8,207,415	23.43%
U.S. National Park Service	5,719	66.83%	774,751	1.36%	2,097,106	5.99%
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service	1,206	14.09%	20,465,014	62.71%	507,585	1.56%
U.S. Bureau of Land Management	0	0.00%	15,687,556	48.02%	192,020	0.59%
U.S. Department of Defense	1,608	18.79%	20,821,541	43.56%	7,570,527	15.84%
Total federal land	8,557	100%	56,961,778	100%	35,033,603	100%
Source: Congressional Research Service, "Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data"

Land usage

Recreation

National parks in Connecticut

Connecticut has two National Park Service units, one national historic trail, one national historic site and one national scenic trail. A study by the U.S. National Park Service found that 22,863 visitors attended Connecticut's national parks and monuments and generated $1.3 million in visitor spending in 2013.

State parks in Connecticut

There are 70 state parks in Connecticut managed by the Connecticut State Parks, a division of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.

Economic activity on federal lands

Oil and gas activity

See also: BLM oil and gas leases by state

Private mining companies, including oil and natural gas companies, can apply for leases from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to explore and produce energy on federal land. The company seeking a lease must nominate the land for oil and gas exploration to the BLM, which evaluates and approves the lease. BLM State Offices make leasing decisions based on its land use plans, which contain information on the land's resources and the potential environmental impact of oil or gas exploration. If federal lands are approved for leasing, the BLM requires an application from the company containing information on how the exploration, drilling and production will be conducted. Afterward, the BLM will produce an environmental analysis and a list of requirements before work on the land can begin. The agency also inspects the companies' drilling and producing on the leased lands.

In 2013, there were 47,427 active leases covering 36.09 million acres of federal land nationwide. Of that total, no leases were in Connecticut. In 2013, out of 3,770 new drilling leases approved nationwide by the BLM for oil and gas exploration, no leases were issued in Connecticut.

The table below shows how Connecticut compared to neighboring states in oil and gas permits on BLM-managed lands in 2013.

Oil and gas leasing on BLM lands by state
State	Active permits on BLM lands (FY 2013)	Total acres under lease (FY 2013)	State percentage of total permits	State percentage of total acres
Connecticut	0	0	0.00%	0.00%
Delaware	0	0	0.00%	0.00%
Maine	0	0	0.00%	0.00%
New York	5	1,183	0.01%	0.00%
New Hampshire	0	0	0.00%	0.00%
Total United States	47,427 permits	36,092,482 acres	-	-
Source: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Oil and Gas Statistics"

Payments in lieu of taxes

See also: Payments in lieu of taxes

Since local governments cannot collect taxes on federally owned property, the U.S. Department of the Interior issues payments to local governments to replace lost property tax revenue from federal land. The payments, known as "Payments in Lieu of Taxes" (PILTs), are typically used for funding services such as fire departments, police protection, school construction and roads.

The table below shows PILTs for Connecticut compared to neighboring states.

Total PILTs for Connecticut and neighboring states
State	FY 2011	FY 2012	FY 2013	State's percentage of 2013 total
Connecticut	$29,011	$29,612	$28,900	0.01%
Delaware	$17,897	$18,268	$17,828	0.00%
Maine	$303,652	$316,048	$299,779	0.07%
New York	$127,278	$152,301	$144,520	0.04%
New Hampshire	$1,750,215	$1,800,869	$1,767,252	0.44%
Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, "PILT"

Legislation and regulation

Federal laws

Clean Air Act

The federal Clean Air Act requires each state to meet federal standards for air pollution. Under the act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency oversees national air quality standards aimed at limiting pollutants from chemical plants, steel mills, utilities, and industrial factories. Individual states can enact stricter air standards if they choose, though each state must adhere to the EPA's minimum pollution standards. States implement federal air standards through a state implementation plan (SIP), which must be approved by the EPA.

Clean Water Act

The federal Clean Water Act is meant to address and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological status of the waters of the United States. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates water pollution sources and provides financial assistance to states and municipalities for water quality programs.

According to research done by The New York Times using annual averages from 2004 to 2007, Connecticut had 180.3 facilities that were regulated annually by the Clean Water Act. An average of 72.8 facilities violated the act annually from 2004 to 2007 in Connecticut, and the EPA enforced the act an average of 5.7 times a year in the state. This information, published by the Times in 2009, was the most recent information on the subject as of October 2014.

The table below shows how Connecticut compared to neighboring states in The New York Times study, including the number of regulated facilities, facility violations, and the annual average of enforcement actions against regulated facilities between 2004 and 2007.

The New York Times Clean Water Act study (2004-2007)
State	Number of facilities regulated	Facility violations	Annual average enforcement actions
Connecticut	180.3	72.8	2.7
Delaware	56.50	13.40	1.10
Maine	343.8	160.8	5.7
New York	1,674.80	855.70	55.10
New Hampshire	101.30	54.80	5.00
Source: The New York Times, "Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record"

Endangered Species Act

The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides for the identification, listing, and protection of both threatened and endangered species and their habitats. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the law was designed to prevent the extinction of vulnerable plant and animal species through the development of recovery plans and the protection of critical habitats. ESA administration and enforcement are the responsibility of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Federally listed species in Connecticut

There were 14 endangered and threatened animal and plant species believed to or known to occur in Connecticut as of July 2015.

The table below lists the 12 endangered and threatened animal species believed to or known to occur in the state. When an animal species has the word "Entire" after its name, that species will be found all throughout the state.

Endangered animal species in Connecticut
Status	Species
Threatened	Plover, piping except Great Lakes watershed (Charadrius melodus)
Threatened	Sea turtle, green Except where endangered (Chelonia mydas)
Endangered	Sea turtle, hawksbill Entire (Eretmochelys imbricata)
Endangered	Sea turtle, Kemp's ridley Entire (Lepidochelys kempii)
Endangered	Sea turtle, leatherback Entire (Dermochelys coriacea)
Endangered	Sturgeon, shortnose Entire (Acipenser brevirostrum)
Endangered	Tern, roseate northeast U.S. nesting pop. (Sterna dougallii dougallii)
Threatened	Tiger beetle, Puritan Entire (Cicindela puritana)
Threatened	Turtle, bog (=Muhlenberg) northern (Clemmys muhlenbergii)
Endangered	Wedgemussel, dwarf Entire (Alasmidonta heterodon)
Endangered	Whale, finback Entire (Balaenoptera physalus)
Endangered	Whale, North Atlantic Right Entire (Eubalaena glacialis)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Connecticut"

The table below lists the two endangered and threatened plant species believed to or known to occur in the state.

Endangered plant species in Connecticut
Status	Species
Endangered	Gerardia, sandplain (Agalinis acuta)
Threatened	Pogonia, small whorled (Isotria medeoloides)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Connecticut"

State listed species in Connecticut

The Connecticut Bureau of Natural Resources manages and conserves state-listed endangered and threatened species. They include amphibians, mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, invertebrates and plants. A complete list of state-listed species in Connecticut according to animal and plant group can be found here.

Enforcement

See also: Enforcement at the EPA

Connecticut is part of the EPA's New England Region, also known as Region 1, which includes Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

The EPA enforces federal standards on air, water and hazardous chemicals. The EPA takes administrative action against violators of environmental laws, or brings civil and/or criminal lawsuits, often with the goal of collecting penalties/fines and demanding compliance with laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. In 2013, the EPA estimated that 149 million pounds of pollution, which includes air pollution, water contaminants, and hazardous chemicals, were "reduced, treated or eliminated" and 16.36 million cubic yards of soil and water were cleaned in Region 1. Additionally, 95 enforcement cases were initiated, and 99 enforcement cases were concluded in fiscal year 2013. In fiscal year 2012, the EPA collected $252 million in criminal fines and civil penalties from the private sector nationwide. In fiscal year 2013, the EPA collected $1.1 billion in criminal fines and civil penalties from the private sector nationwide, primarily due to the $1 billion settlement from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill along the Gulf Coast in 2010. The EPA only publishes nationwide data and does not provide state or region-specific information on the amount of fines and penalties it collects during a fiscal year.

Mercury and air toxics standards

See also: Mercury and air toxics standards

The EPA on mercury capture systems

The EPA enforces mercury and air toxics standards (MATS), which are national limits on mercury, chromium, nickel, arsenic and acidic gases from coal- and oil-fired power plants. Power plants are required to have certain technologies to limit these pollutants. In December 2011, the EPA issued greater restrictions on the amount of mercury and other toxic pollutants produced by power plants. As of 2014, approximately 580 power plants, including 1,400 oil- and coal-fired electric-generating units, fell under the federal rule. The EPA has claimed that power plants account for 50 percent of mercury emissions, 75 percent of acidic gases and around 20 to 60 percent of toxic metal emissions in the United States. All coal- and oil-fired power plants with a capacity of 25 megawatts or greater are subject to the standards. The EPA has claimed that the standards will "prevent up to 90 premature deaths in Connecticut while creating up to $750 million in health benefits in 2016."

Analysis

Several studies examine the economic and environmental impact of the MATS standards nationwide. These studies present conflicting evidence on the standard's costs and benefits. The EPA produced its own study of the standards' economic, environmental and health effects while other studies, published by private sector organizations, rebut or respond to the EPA's analysis of its policies. Below is a summary of the studies on MATS and their effects as of November 2014.

EPA study
In 2014, the EPA argued that its MATS rule would prevent roughly 11,000 premature deaths and 130,000 asthma attacks nationwide. The agency also estimated between $37 billion and $90 billion in "improved air quality benefits" annually. For the rule's cost, the EPA estimated that annual compliance costs will reach $9.6 billion.

NERA study
A 2012 study published by NERA Economic Consulting, a global consultancy group, reported that annual compliance costs in the electricity sector would total $10 billion in 2015 and nearly $100 billion cumulatively up through 2034. The same study found that the net impact of the MATS rule in 2015 would be the income equivalent of 180,000 fewer jobs. This net impact took into account the job gains associated with the building and refitting of power plants with new technology.

Superfund sites

The EPA established the Superfund program as part of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980.The program identifies uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites nationwide. The Superfund program assesses these sites and establishes cleanup plans for them. The EPA can compel private parties to perform cleanups or reimburse the federal government for EPA-lead cleanups. Superfund sites can include oil refineries, smelting facilities, mines or other industrial areas. As of October 2014, there were 1,322 Superfund sites nationwide. A total of 116 Superfund sites reside in Region 1, with an average of 19 sites per state. There were 18 Superfund sites in Connecticut as of October 2014.

Economic impact

EPA studies
The Environmental Protection Agency publishes studies to evaluate the impact and benefits of its policies. Other studies may dispute the agency's findings or state the costs of its policies.

The EPA touts the economic benefits of the agency's Superfund program on a nationwide basis. Although the EPA has not analyzed the Superfund program's economic impact on the state of Connecticut, the agency has presented an analysis of 373 Superfund sites throughout the United States that have produced economic benefits because of the program. These include the following:

• 2,240 private businesses
• $32.6 billion in annual sales from new businesses
• 70,144 jobs
• $4.9 billion in annual employment income

Other studies were published detailing the costs associated with the Superfund program.

• According to the Property and Environment Research Center, a free market-oriented policy group based in Montana, the EPA spent over $35 billion on the Superfund program between 1980 and 2005.
• According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent federal agency, the Superfund program received an average of almost $1.2 billion annually in appropriated funds between the years 1981 and 2009, adjusted for inflation. The GAO estimated that the trust fund of the Superfund program decreased from $5 billion in 1997 to $137 million in 2009. The Superfund program received an additional $600 million in federal funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the stimulus bill.

Environmental impact

In March 2011, the EPA claimed that the Superfund program resulted in healthier environments surrounding former waste sites. An agency study analyzed the program's health and ecological benefits and focused on former landfills, mining areas, and abandoned dumps that were cleaned up and renovated. As of January 2009, out of the approximately 500 former Superfund sites used for the study, roughly 10 percent became recreational or commercial sites. Other former Superfund sites in the study became wetlands, meadows, streams, scenic trails, parks, and habitats for plants and animals.

Carbon emissions

See also: Climate change, Greenhouse gas and Greenhouse gas emissions by state

In 2011, Connecticut had the 41st highest carbon emissions in the United States, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Carbon emissions held steady in Connecticut between 1990 and 2010. Emissions peaked in 2004 and 2005 when 43 million metric tons of CO₂ were emitted. The transportation sector emitted 45.2 percent of the state's CO₂ in 2011. The residential sector was responsible for 21.8 percent. The industrial, electric power and commercial sectors accounted for the remainder.

Carbon dioxide emissions in Connecticut (in million metric tons). Data was compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Carbon dioxide emissions in Connecticut by sector

Pollution from energy use

Pollution from energy use includes three common air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone. These and other pollutants are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which are federal standards limiting pollutants that can harm human health in significant concentrations. Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is also regulated by the EPA, but it is excluded here since it is not one of the pollutants originally regulated under the Clean Air Act for its harm to human health.

Industries and motor vehicles emit carbon monoxide directly when they use energy. Nitrogen dioxide forms from the emissions of automobiles, power plants and other sources. Ground level ozone (also known as tropospheric ozone) is not emitted but is the product of chemical reactions between nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic chemicals. The EPA tracks these and other pollutants from monitoring sites across the United States. The data below shows nationwide and regional trends for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone between 2000 and 2014. States with consistent climates and weather patterns were grouped together by the EPA to make up each region.

Carbon monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas produced from combustion processes, e.g., when gasoline reacts rapidly with oxygen and releases exhaust; the majority of national CO emissions come from mobile sources like automobiles. CO can reduce the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood and at very high levels can cause death. CO concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm). Since 1994, federal law prohibits CO concentrations from exceeding 9 ppm during an eight-hour period more than once per year.

The chart below compares the annual average concentration of carbon monoxide in the Northeastern and Southeastern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. States with consistent climates and weather patterns are grouped together by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which collects these data, to make up each region. Each line represents the annual average of all the data collected from pollution monitoring sites in each region. In the Northeast, there were 32 monitoring sites throughout 11 states, compared to 22 monitoring sites throughout six states in the Southeast. In 2000, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 2.7 ppm in the Northeast, compared to 3.91 ppm in the Southeast. In 2014, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 1.2 ppm in the Northeast, a decrease of 61.1 percent from 2000, compared to 1.52 ppm in the Southeast, a decrease of 56.7 percent from 2000.

Nitrogen dioxide (NO₂)

Nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) is one of a group of gasses known as nitrogen oxides (NO_x). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) measures NO₂ as a representative for the larger group of nitrogen oxides. NO₂ forms from the emissions of cars, buses, trucks, power plants, and off-road equipment. It helps form ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution, and has been linked to respiratory problems. Since 1971, federal law prohibits NO₂ concentrations from exceeding a daily one-hour average of 100 parts per billion (ppb) and an annual average of 53 parts per billion (ppb).

The chart below compares the annual one-hour average concentration of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) in the Northeastern and Southeastern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. In the Northeast, there were 32 monitoring sites throughout 11 states, compared to 14 monitoring sites throughout six states in the Southeast. In 2000, the one-hour daily average concentration of NO₂ was 61.31 ppb in the Northeast, compared to 57 ppb in the Southeast. In 2014, the one-hour daily average concentration of NO₂ was 43.98 ppb in the Northeast, a decrease of 28.2 percent since 2000, compared to 38.36 ppb in the Southeast, a decrease of 32.6 percent since 2000.

Ground-level ozone

Ground-level ozone is created by chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in sunlight. Major sources of NO_x and VOCs include industrial facilities, electric utilities, automobiles, gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents. Ground-level ozone can produce health problems for children, the elderly, and asthmatics. Since 2008, federal law has prohibited ozone concentrations from exceeding a daily eight-hour average of 75 parts per billion (ppb). Beginning in 2025, federal law will prohibit ground-level ozone concentrations from exceeding a daily eight-hour average of 70 ppb.

The chart below compares the daily eight-hour average concentration of ground-level ozone in the Northeastern and Southeastern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. In the chart below, ozone concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm), which can be converted to parts per billion (ppb). In the Northeast, there were 133 monitoring sites throughout 11 states, compared to 153 monitoring sites throughout six states in the Southeast. In 2000, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.083 ppm, or 83 ppb in the Northeast, compared to 0.082 ppm, or 82 ppb in the Southeast. In 2014, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.066 ppm, or 66 ppb in the Northeast, a decrease of 19.5 percent since 2000, compared to 0.063 ppm, or 63 ppb in the Southeast, a decrease of 23.9 percent since 2000.

State laws

Connecticut State Capitol in Hartford, Connecticut.

Title 22a of the Connecticut General Statutes contains the laws and regulations covering environmental protection. Specific chapters cover wetlands, radioactive materials, waste management, water resources, soil conservation and more. The full text of these laws and regulations can be found here.

Enforcement

The Environmental Quality division regulates the state's air, water and lands. 5 major bureaus, listed below, deal exclusively with a single environmental quality issue. These bureaus run programs to regulate air, water, land and waste materials. The major state bureaus regulate in the following areas:

1. Air management
2. Water protection
3. Materials management
4. Compliance assurance
5. Land reuse

• The Bureau of Air Management monitors air quality and issues permits for major industrial sources of air pollutants. The bureau issues a daily Air Quality Index (AQI) that provides a predicted air quality value for various towns and areas in the state. It also performs the following in regulating air quality:

1. The bureau's permits require facilities to limit their emissions through control technologies or limitations on the facility's day-to-day operations.
2. The bureau writes permit criteria and requirements for facilities seeking to construct or modify their operations.
3. According to the bureau, for the state's two major permit programs, the average for processing the permits span between 90 and 180 days, depending on the reason for the permit (such as a new permit or modifying an existing permit).

• Land use decisions in Connecticut are typically made at the local level by volunteers on land use boards and other commissions. No single state program addresses all land use issues. Land use programs exist for resource protection and land conservation. There are also programs dedicated more to research and data-gathering for land and water resources. Other programs address the cleanup of contaminated sites, wetlands, forest management and wildlife, and information collecting on soil, geology and water.

• The Bureau of Water Quality writes water quality standards for surface water, drinking water and ground water sources. The bureau's programs address stormwater management, agricultural and industrial wastewater, and municipal wastewater. The bureau's Aquifer Protection Program regulates all major public water supply wells for sand and gravel contamination.

• Waste management programs and control of waste materials like petroleum products, industrial chemicals, radioactive materials, pesticides, PCBs and other solid and hazardous wastes are operated under the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. The programs seek waste minimization, recycling, the beneficial use of solid wastes and spill prevention and control methods.

• The Bureau of Natural Resources writes fish, wildlife and forest management regulations. It also conducts scientific studies and assessments of natural resources and wildlife habitats.

State environmental policy act

See also: State environmental policy acts

Penwood State Park in Bloomfield, Connecticut.

Several states have passed variations of what is commonly called a state environmental policy act, each of which requires that proposed state government actions (and in some states, local government or private actions) be evaluated for their potential impact on the environment or public health. For most proposed actions, state agencies prepare environmental impact statements that outline all potential environmental consequences of these actions, potential alternatives, the unavoidable environmental effects and the steps to be taken by state agencies to mitigate these effects and consequences.

The Connecticut Environmental Policy Act (CEPA) requires all proposed state actions to be identified and evaluated for their potential impact on the environment. Every Connecticut state department, institution and agency is responsible for publishing an environmental assessment of proposed activities called an Environmental Impact Evaluation (EIE). These environmental assessments are required for the construction of coal-fired heating plants, hazardous waste disposal facilities and sewage treatment plants. Some activities require a more substantial evaluation of their environmental impacts due to their size and scale, such as the construction of paved roads or lane additions to existing roads (exceeding $1 million) and changes to dams, rivers or streams.

For most kinds of state activities that may require an environmental review, the agency responsible will conduct a preliminary process to seek out public comments and information from other state agencies even before a decision to publish an impact statement is made. Some agencies will hold public meetings where details of a proposed state activity will be presented, including its purpose, the potential sites for the project and any potential alternatives. Every member of the public and all state agency representatives are allowed to comment on all potential environmental impacts. Comment periods last at least 30 days after a notice is announced or at least five days following a public meeting, if one is held. All environmental impact assessments are published on a state agency's website.

The Environmental Impact Evaluation (EIE) will include the statement of a proposed action, its purpose and a description of the environment in the surrounding area that would be affected. Connecticut is required to include the impacts on the following environmental issues:

• air and water quality
• ambient noise levels
• ground water
• wetlands
• flooding
• critical animal or plant species and their habitats
• pesticides
• disruption of an established neighborhood or community

Historical budget information

The table below shows the total expenditures on the environment and natural resources in Connecticut and in neighboring states.

Total state natural resource expenditures by state
State	Departments/Divisions	FY 2013	FY 2012	FY 2011
Connecticut	Environmental Quality; Environmental Conservation; Clean Air; Solid Waste Management	$27,808,772	$26,960,308	$27,572,628
Delaware	Natural Resources and Environmental Control	$131,880,700	$131,610,100	$123,677,800
Maine	Environmental Protection	$67,966,743	$77,783,694	$77,404,302
New York	Environmental Conservation	$897,781,000	$1,085,226,000	$947,722,000
New Hampshire	Environmental Services	$118,652,082	$198,217,387	$225,939,534
Sources: Connecticut General Assembly, Delaware Office of Management and Budget, Maine State Legislature, New York Division of the Budget, New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services

Major groups

Below is a list of environmental advocacy organizations in Connecticut. A complete list of environmental groups by state can be accessed on the website Eco-USA.

• Environment Connecticut
• Connecticut GreenScene
• Sierra Club - Connecticut Chapter
• Connecticut League of Conservation Voters
• Connecticut Outdoor and Environmental Education Association

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Connecticut environmental policy. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Historical Connecticut environmental information, 1971-2016 - Google News

See also

• Environmental policy in Connecticut
• Environmental policy in the United States
• Energy policy in the United States
• Energy policy in Connecticut
• Federal land ownership by state
• Payments in lieu of taxes

External links

• Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Footnotes

Ballotpedia

About

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

---

Executive: Leslie Graves, Founder and CEO • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer

Communications: Alison Graves, Director of Communications • Carley Allensworth • Abigail Campbell • Frank Festa • Sarah Groat • Nathaniel Harwood • Dillon Redmond • Erica Shumaker
External Relations: Geoff Pallay, Director of External Relations • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Ashley Fleming • Thomas Mardik • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski, Director of Operations • Amanda Herbert • Mandy Morris • Caroline Presnell • Kelly Rindfleisch
Tech: Matt Latourelle, Director of Technology Operations • Ryan Burch • Kirsten Corrao • Beth Dellea • Travis Eden • Tate Kamish • Margaret Kearney • Eric Lotto • Joseph Sanchez • Mary Susmitha

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

---

Editorial Content

Josh Altic, Director of Content • Daniel Anderson, Associate Director of Elections & Data • Cory Eucalitto, Associate Director of Features • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor of Ballot Measures • Mandy McConnell, Managing Editor of News • Doug Kronaizl, Managing Editor of Local Expansion • Abbey Smith, Managing Editor of Elections • Janie Valentine, Managing Editor of Law • Joel Williams. Managing Editor of Events • Andrew Bahl • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Jon Dunn • Thomas Ellis • Nicole Fisher • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Jaime Healy-Plotkin • Brianna Hosea • Molly Kehoe • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Nathan Maxwell • Jimmy McAllister • Brandon McCauley • Ellie Mikus • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Annelise Reinwald • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Emma Soukup • Alexis Thacker • Mina Vogel • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox