Alan Merrifield owns Urban Wildlife Management, a California based business that performs nonpesticide animal removal and exclusion. He has 30 years of experience and holds several license certifications from the state and wildlife control trade groups.
Obtaining a license as required by California prior to this ruling all applicants had to pass a 200-question pesticide examination and have two years’ experience in handling pesticides–and yet Mr. Merrifield doesn’t even use pesticides.
“We are recommending that Consumers find the opening, close them and trap the animals out and if they happen to be locked in provide one way doors to allow the animals leave on their own”
“I have been fighting the use of pesticides in buildings for over 30 years. This is an issue near and dear to my heart.”
California law required that Merrifield also get a “Branch 2 Structural Pest Control Operators’ License” to use nonpesticide techniques on pigeons, rats, and mice. (Yet No license was required for treating other vertebrate pests, like bats, raccoons, or skunks.)
This unreasonable licensing rule was designed simply to protect established pest control companies against fair competition by Mr. Merrifield, the judges held, and ruled that was not a legitimate goal for the government to pursue. This important victory has now helped clear the way for entrepreneurs to pursue their constitutional right to earn a living.
For wildlife controllers and other business entrepreneurs they need to go to the web site of the Legal Foundation PacificLegal.Org and review his case.