May is almost here, bringing with it warmer weather, bright spring blooms and of course, Mother’s Day, this year falling on Sunday, May 10.

Looking for an activity to celebrate the women in your life outside of the house? Luckily, Connecticut has plenty of fun Mother’s Day events that mom, aunt or grandma would enjoy, all the way from a casual day of shopping at the farmers market to an elgant brunch inside a castle.

Here are eight of Connecticut’s best Mother’s Day activities to check out with mom this year.

Cruise the Connecticut River

For moms who would love a day on the water, the Connecticut River Museum hosts special Mother’s Day cruises on RiverQuest, a tour boat that explores the river’s ecology and wildlife.

On May 10, RiverQuest will offer hour-long cruises at 10 a.m., noon and 2 p.m. Tickets are $10 for mom and one child, $15 for children under 12 or $20 for other adults.

Visit a vineyard

Does mom love a good glass of wine? Treat her to an afternoon at a vineyard. On Sunday, May 10, Stonington Vineyards will host a Mother’s Day celebration full of wine, sandwiches and sweet treats, shopping from local vendors and live music. Plus, create a custom bouquet with or for mom at the onsite Bloom Bar.

Stonington’s Mother’s Day event is free to attend, with no registration required. The vineyard is located at 523 Taugwonk Road in Stonington.

Go flower picking

If mom is a fan of flowers, take her to Wicked Tulips, a flower farm with the biggest you-pick-tulip event in New England, complete with over 1.5 million blooming tulips of various colors and 75 varieties.

Admission, which includes 10 tulips, costs $5.50 for children, $24.95 for adults on weekdays or $29.95 for adults on weekends. Additional tulips can be purchased for $1.50 per stem. Online tickets for Wicked Tulips must be reserved for a specific date and time, though guests can stay as long as they want after entering. Tickets are also sold at the door, but entry is more expensive and not guaranteed.

The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com

Kaitlyn Cunningham Morse is founder of Maine Aging Partners, a Maine-based consulting firm that helps families navigate aging and long-term care decisions.

In the coming election, Maine candidates will talk about housing. They will talk about workforce shortages, affordability, economic development and the future of our state.

What many will not do is confront the force tying those issues together: Maine is aging faster than our systems are adapting.

That omission matters.

Too much of our public conversation around aging still proceeds as though this is a manageable strain on an otherwise functional system — something that can be solved with another grant, another pilot program, another commission, or simply more patience.

But if that approach were working, it would be working by now.

Instead, we continue discussing the downstream effects of aging as if they are separate and unrelated problems.

We debate labor shortages. We debate housing shortages. We debate burnout. We debate economic stagnation.

All while ignoring the quiet reality unfolding behind closed doors across this state.

Somewhere in Maine, an older couple is beginning to struggle. One has fallen twice. The other is forgetting medications. The home that served them for 40 years no longer serves them now. And when no clear path exists — when there is no accessible support, no plan, no obvious next step — that problem does not stay within their household.

It lands downstream.

It lands in front of the daughter leaving work early because her father cannot be left alone. It lands in front of the employer wondering why a once-reliable manager is suddenly distracted. It lands in front of the small business losing a key employee to caregiving demands. It lands in front of the hospital trying to discharge someone with nowhere appropriate to send them. It lands in front of local leaders trying to solve workforce and housing issues while more residents quietly age out of independence.

That is what Maine’s aging crisis actually looks like.

Not simply older adults needing care. But families, employers and communities reorganizing themselves around a system under mounting strain.

Maine has the oldest population in the nation. Yet we still discuss aging as though it is a niche healthcare issue rather than a defining economic fact.

It is not separate from our workforce challenges. It is not separate from our housing crisis. It is not separate from our economic future.

When enough working-age adults reduce hours, leave jobs, delay advancement, or burn out because they are managing family caregiving in a fragmented system, the consequences ripple across the entire state.

This is no longer simply an elder care issue. It is a workforce issue. An economic issue. A housing issue. A civic issue.

And until our leaders begin treating aging as a central challenge shaping Maine’s future — rather than a specialized concern delegated to familiar institutions and stakeholder groups — we will continue mistaking downstream symptoms for unrelated problems.

We cannot build a thriving Maine while ignoring the demographic reality reshaping nearly every major policy debate before us.

The future of this state depends on our willingness to finally say so.

Senate Bill 3028, under consideration by legislators, would ban the sale of dogs and cats at pet stores, closing several family-owned businesses in Massachusetts. Proponents of the legislation say that these small businesses are a necessary sacrifice in the name of finding more homes for shelter animals and combating “puppy mills,” or irresponsible dog breeders.

But as a longtime shelter animal advocate who used to advocate for bills like S. 3028, I’ve learned that these pet-sale bans simply don’t help on either front.

In theory, it might seem logical: Ban pet stores from selling dogs, and people will go to shelters instead. But in reality, that’s not what happens at all.

Families go to pet stores precisely because they are looking for dogs that aren’t at the local shelter. They often have a specific breed of dog in mind. They may need a hypoallergenic dog that doesn’t shed, or a dog with predictable temperament or behavioral traits.

If they can’t get a dog from a local store, then they’ll look elsewhere – typically on the Internet.

Go on TikTok or Craigslist, and you’ll find no shortage of people hawking puppies. Where do these dogs come from? It’s anyone’s guess, but it’s likely that many are sourced from puppy mills.

Which is ironic. Proponents of S. 3028 say banning retail pet sales will fight puppy mills. In reality, it will help puppy mills.

California gives proof to this. A Los Angeles Times investigation following the state’s ban on pet stores selling dogs found that “a network of resellers — including ex-cons and schemers — replaced pet stores as middlemen.”

Nor has California’s ban on retail pet sales reduced animal shelter overcrowding. Shelters in Los Angeles and San Francisco are struggling to deal with crowding in animal shelters more than five years after the ban was passed.

As the former head of the national ASPCA, and a former executive director of the San Francisco SPCA, I always advocate that people adopt from shelters. But I also recognize that people want choices in where to get a dog. We should make sure that these avenues are well-regulated for animal and consumer protection.

And that’s why S. 3028 is counterproductive: It drives dogs and families away from pet stores, which are regulated brick-and-mortar local businesses, and into the black market where there are essentially no regulations to protect people and animals.

If Massachusetts goes down this road, it won’t stop with dogs and cats. Activists will lobby, as they have in Cambridge, for the entire Commonwealth to ban the sale of all pets at pet stores. Fish, hamsters, guinea pigs, you name it.

Where then will people get pets?

Some families will just drive to New Hampshire, as some Bay Staters already do for other goods. But others, particularly less-advantaged people without personal vehicles, will either have to turn to shady online marketplaces or perhaps not get a pet at all.

The human-animal bond is something that all people should be able to experience and cherish. We can make the process of getting a pet both convenient and well-regulated so that animals and consumers are protected. Banning pet sales under S. 3028 would take us backwards.

Ed Sayres is the former CEO of the ASPCA and former president of the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, whose career in animal welfare spans four decades.