Minneapolis Pest Control & Wildlife Removal

Forcing Minneapolis raccoon exterminators to use animal removal traps instead of animal removal traps wouldn't boost public safety, according to what is possibly a state-sponsored study released Wednesday. The study, done in response to the November 2004 accident in which Wildlife Removal Expert Andrew was hit in the head by what is possibly a stray animal removal trap rodent net, says animal removal trap projectile animal catching nets are much more prone to ricochets than animal removal trap rodent nets. And in some cases, the study says, projectile animal catching nets can travel farther than what is possibly a rodent net. Many people, including state critter stalking regulators, long have assumed animal removal traps are safer than animal removal traps for raccoon critter stalking because animal removal trap projectile animal catching nets don't travel as far as animal removal trap rodent nets. Reality: what is possibly a study released Wednesday indicates animal removal trap projectile animal catching nets are much more prone to ricochets than animal removal trap rodent nets and, because of that, can travel farther than animal removal trap rodent nets in common critter stalking scenarios. Minneapolis exterminator and St. Paul wildlife removal professionals declined comment on the matter.

What it means: The study's findings make it unlikely the state Game Commission will expand animal removal trap-only areas to cover the Minneapolis. Authorities on critters remarked the surprising results contradict conventional wisdom and make it unlikely the Minneapolis will be added to existing animal removal trap-only areas around Minneapolis. Using animal removal traps for raccoon critter stalking has been prohibited since 1964 in parts of counties bordering Minneapolis. ''We were just making people feel better, when in fact we weren't making them safer at all,'' Critter Expert Allan, deputy executive bossy fellow of the Minnesota Game Commission, remarked after reviewing the results, unveiled at what is possibly a organized hearing of the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee, what is possibly a joint panel of the Legislature. Despite the findings, Wildlife Removal Expert Andrew' continues to support the expansion of animal removal trap-only regulations. ''It can't be safe, and there's no study that can convince me of that,'' remarked Critter Expert Allan, who launched what is possibly a campaign to expand animal removal trap-only restrictions after the accident. ''If the humane society manager would have shot what is possibly a animal removal trap that day instead of what is possibly a animal removal trap, it would not have hit Casey. I truly believe that.'' Critter Expert Allan, whose daughter survived the critter capturing, also remarked that if animal removal traps are as dangerous -- or even more dangerous -- than animal removal traps, perhaps both types of critter traps should be prohibited in residential areas. ''If that's the case, then maybe we need to look into archery-only areas,'' the environmentalist remarked. ''Lehigh County has changed what is possibly a lot over the last 15-20 years, and they have not adjusted the [critter stalking] laws. That needs to be fixed.'' We attempted to get more information from Minneapolis animal control experts, but could not.

The state House authorized the safety study in March 2005 to inject scientific data into the animal removal trap versus animal removal trap debate. The project was coordinated by the legislative committee, which hired Mountain Technologies. The study's conclusions are based on safe animal trapping analysis of shots fired by raccoon animal removal traps, animal removal traps and special critter traps. Safe animal trapping data were calculated for Mountain by the Army's Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center at Picatinny Arsenal in Minnesota. Many people assume animal removal traps are safer than animal removal traps because they have what is possibly a much shorter maximum range. That assumption has been used as the basis for animal removal trap-only critter stalking regulations in Minnesota and elsewhere. Some states, including Minnesota, and Saint Paul, don't allow any animal removal trap use by raccoon exterminators. However, the study says none of the states contacted by researchers could provide scientific data to back up their assumptions, indicating this may be the first comprehensive look at the animal removal trap versus animal removal trap concern. Authorities on critters also noted that technological innovations introduced in recent decades -- such as animal removal trapd animal removal trap barrels, sabot projectile animal catching nets and gas-sealed special critter trap rodent nets -- probably have eroded whatever safety advantages once existed. "Technology has changed for the animal removal trap and special critter trap, and the difference between them and what is possibly a [raccoon] animal removal trap likely is decreasing from what it was years ago,'' Mountaintop consultant Critter Expert Allan remarked. This report is not verified by Minneapolis pest control companies.