I had a chance to interview Mr. Alan Merrifield and who gratefully shared his story with The Wildlife Pro Network. I highly encourage all in the wildlife control industry and anyone who is fighting for the opportunity to operate a business and facing an uphill battle and laws enacted in their own states to listen to what Alan has to say here in my interview. His case and his victory in the courts is a story for all Americans to learn even the little guy has a chance against all odds.
You can listen to the full interview by clicking the link below:
The Alan Merrifield Interview, Wildlife Control Professional Wins Big Victory In The US Ninth Circuit of Appeals, 6 Jan 2009
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.
"Consumers no longer will have to take what is offered to them by the pesticide industry by putting up Decon or other poison baits in structures."
"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."
"The good news is that Wildlife controllers don't have to take it anymore. There are more and more legal precedents out there to help fight the system.We no longer have to go out and hide behind the trees anymore. We should be able to go out and pursue the occupation of our choice. We have a Constitutional right to do that and now be able to express those rights"
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. below you find a letter posted by Alan to The Wildlife Pro Network.
Fellow Wildlife Control Operators,
It is my distinct honor to inform you that the California CO Association has won another legal battle in defense of our constitutional right to earn an honest living without having to overcome undue government interference.
On January 6th, the Ninth United States Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the State's petition for en banc hearing of our case. Had 14 judges approved the State's request, we would have had to file another brief and make still another oral argument before an 11 judge panel. But that's not going to happen now. Unless the State of California decides to file a Writ of Certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to intervene, this case is over after a very long six year series of courtroom battles.
This legal victory represents the very first time since 1868 that an state occupational licensing law was overturned and found unconstitutional. It is only the second time in the entire history of the United States that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution has been used to smash a state-sponsored cartel. This was truly a David versus Goliath encounter where David kicked ass again.
The case of Merrifield v Lockyer is a landmark case establishing a number of legal precedents. important to entrepreneurs in general and Wildlife Control Operators in particular. I will be organizing my thoughts and will be speaking out on the meaning of this groundbreaking news in the near future. Until then, I encourage WCOs everywhere to become familiar with the legal principals established in this case and then explore the possibilities of using the decision to support unfair laws and regulations in your respective states.
Alan Merrifield
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment