|Statute by category||Citation||Summary|
|AZ - Assistance Animal - Arizona's Assistance Animal/Guide Dog Laws||A. R. S. § 11-1008; § 11-1024, § 13-2910; § 9-500.32||
The following statutes comprise the state's relevant assistance animal and guide dog laws.
|AZ - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty/Animal Fighting Statutes||A. R. S. § 12-1011; § 13-2910 - 09; § 13-1411||
The Arizona section contains the state's anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions. A person commits cruelty to animals if he or she intentionally, knowingly or recklessly subjects any animal under the person's custody or control to cruel neglect or abandonment, fails to provide medical attention necessary to prevent protracted suffering to any animal under the person's custody or control, inflicts unnecessary physical injury to any animal, or recklessly subjects any animal to cruel mistreatment, among other things. Animal is defined as a mammal, bird, reptile or amphibian. Exclusions include hunting and agricultural activities in accordance with those laws and regulations in Arizona. Intentionally attending a dogfight is a felony under this provision whereas attendance at a cockfight is a misdemeanor.
|AZ - Dog - Arizona Consolidated Dog Laws||A. R. S. § 11-1001 - 1029; § 28-2422 - 2422.02; § 17-309||
These Arizona statutes comprise the laws relating to dogs and animal bites. Included are provisions related to registration, collaring, and vaccination of dogs. With regard to dangerous dogs, Arizona law provides that a person with knowledge of a dog's vicious propensity must also keep the dog in an enclosed yard or confined area with a sign indicating the dog's vicious tendencies.
|AZ - Dog Ordinances - Powers and duties of board of supervisors (dogs/animals)||A. R. S. § 11-1005||
This Arizona statute provides that each county board of supervisors may regulate dogs, including the designation of a county enforcement agent, contracting with any city or town to enforce the provisions of any ordinance enacted by such city or town for the control of dogs, and f or the unincorporated areas of the county, by ordinance, regulate, restrain and prohibit the running at large of dogs and the excessive and unrestrained barking of dogs. They may also establish either civil or criminal penalties for violations of the above ordinances and establish a rabies quarantine zone.
|AZ - Domestic Violence - Chapter 36. Family Offenses.||A. R. S. § 13-3602||
This Arizona law provides that, if a court issues an order of protection, the court may grant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody or control of any animal that is owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by the petitioner, the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the petitioner or the respondent, and order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, committing an act of cruelty or neglect in violation of section 13- 2910 or otherwise disposing of the animal.
|AZ - Endangered, nongame - Illegal Taking or Wounding of Wildlife||A. R. S. § 17-268, § 17-296, § 17-298, § 17-298.01, § 17-314, § 17-401 - 407||
Arizona assesses a monetary civil penalty for the possession or taking of listed species of wildlife and endangered/nongame wildlife (including eagles). This fine goes to the state wildlife theft prevention fund and is in addition to any other fine or penalty assessed by law.
|AZ - Equine Activity Liability Statute||A. R. S. § 12-553||
This Arizona statute provides that an equine agent or owner is not liable for injury if the participant took control of the equine prior to injury, if a parent or guardian signed a release on behalf of a minor, if the owner or agent has properly installed suitable tack or the participant has personally tacked the equine, or the owner or agent assigns a suitable equine based on a reasonable interpretation of the person's representation of his or her skills, health and experience with and knowledge of equines. Liability is not limited, however, when an equine owner or agent is grossly negligent or commits willful, wanton or intentional acts or omissions.
|AZ - Equine Transport - Transporting equine in a cruel manner; violation;||A. R. S. § 3-1312; § 28-912||
These Arizona laws provide the requirements for transporting equines to slaughter. A vehicle used to transport equine for slaughter may have no more than one level or tier in the compartment containing the equine. Violation of the laws constitutes a misdemeanor.
|AZ - Facility Dog - § 8-422. Use of a facility dog in court proceedings; definition||A. R. S. § 8-422||This Arizona law states that a court shall allow a facility dog to accompany a victim who is under 18 while he or she is testifying in court. A party seeking the use of a facility dog must file a notice with the court that includes the certification of the facility dog, the name of the person or entity who certified the dog and evidence that the facility dog is insured. It is discretionary for the court to allow a facility dog for a victim over the age of 18.|
|AZ - Fish and Wildlife - Title 17. Game and Fish (enforcement sections)||A. R. S. § 17-101; § 17-104; § 17-201; § 17-231; § 17-238; § 17-306; § 17-309||
This set of statutes is comprised of the sections within Arizona's Game and Fish Code that are relevant to the possession of wildlife, including: the authority of the Department of Game and Fish and the Game and Fish Commission to regulate wildlife, enforcement authority and duties, definitions, restrictions on the possession of wildlife, licenses, and violations.
|AZ - Horse slaughter - Article 4. Horsemeat.||A.R.S. § 3-2121 - 2132||
This Arizona article deals with horsemeat. A license shall be obtained from the division before slaughtering a horse for human consumption. There shall be an antemortem and a postmortem inspection of each horse slaughtered. All horsemeat food products shall be conspicuously branded, marked, tagged or labeled, “horsemeat” or “horsemeat product.” It is unlawful to offer horsemeat for sale for human consumption unless there is prominently displayed in conjunction therewith a sign bearing the words, in letters not less than eight inches in height and three inches in width, “horsemeat for human consumption.”
|AZ - Humane Slaughter - Slaughter of Animals||A. R. S. § 3-2001 to 2017||
This Arizona statutory section covers the slaughter of animals. Among its provisions include license requirements for the slaughter meat, recordkeeping requirements, and a section relating to humane slaughter. The humane slaughter law requires that a livestock animal is rendered insensible to pain prior to being hoisted or shackled; however, none of the provisions apply to one who slaughters an animal for his or her own uses. Interestingly, while the other provisions relating to adulterated meat and licensing requirements describe the penalty for violation, no penalty is listed under the humane slaughter statute.
|AZ - Hunting - § 17-316. Interference with rights of hunters; classification; civil action; exceptions||A. R. S. § 17-316||
This law represents Arizona's hunter harassment law. Under the law, it is a class 2 misdemeanor for a person while in a hunting area to intentionally interfere with, prevent or disrupt the lawful taking of wildlife as defined under the law. It is a class 3 misdemeanor for a person to enter or remain on a designated hunting area on any public or private lands or waters or state lands including state trust lands with the intent to interfere with, prevent or disrupt the lawful taking of wildlife. "Incidental interference" arising from lawful activity by public land users is not unlawful under this section.
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 102 (voter wildlife initatives)||Proposition 102 (2000)||This 2000 Arizona ballot proposition sought to restrict voter initiatives related to wildlife. It was defeated with only 37.5% voting for the measures. According to the summary by the Arizona Legislative Council, Proposition 102 directs the State to manage wildlife in the public trust to assure the continued existence of wildlife populations. Public trust is a legal concept relating to the ownership, protection and use of natural resources. Under the public trust, the State must manage wildlife for the public benefit, which includes both present and future generations. Proposition 102 would also amend the Arizona Constitution to require that any initiative measure relating to the taking of wildlife does not go into effect unless it is approved by at least two-thirds of the voters who vote on the measure. Currently, the Arizona Constitution requires a simple majority vote for initiative measures. The two-thirds requirement would also apply to measures authorizing or restricting (1) the methods of taking wildlife (2) the seasons when wildlife may be taken. The two-thirds requirement would not apply to legislative enactments or to measures that the Legislature refers to the voters.|
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 109 (right to hunt and fish)||Proposition 109 (2010)||Proposition 109 would have amended the Arizona Constitution. It failed with only 43.5% voting "yes" for the measure. The proposition stated that: 1. Wildlife is held in trust for the citizens of this state, whom have a right to lawfully hunt, fish and harvest the wildlife. 2. The legislature has the exclusive authority to enact laws to regulate hunting, fishing and harvesting of wildlife. The legislature may grant rule making authority to a game and fish commission. No law or rule shall unreasonably restrict hunting, fishing or harvesting of wildlife or the use of traditional means and methods for those activities. Any law or rule shall have the purpose of wildlife conservation and management and preserving the future of hunting and fishing. 3. Lawful public hunting and fishing are the preferred means of managing and controlling wildlife. By its terms, nothing in Proposition 109 shall be construed to modify any law relating to trespass or property rights.|
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 201 (cockfighting)||Proposition 201 (1998)||Proposition 201 would amend state law to create the crime of cockfighting. Cockfighting would be classified as a class 5 felony, generally punishable by a possible fine of up to $150,000 and a possible prison term ranging from nine months to two years. Presence at a cockfight would be classified as a class 1 misdemeanor, generally punishable by a possible fine of up to $2,500 and a possible jail term of up to six months. This proposition would extend existing state law animal cruelty exemptions and defenses that apply to lawful hunting, ranching, farming, rodeos and related activities to also apply to cockfighting. The measure passed in 1998 with 68.1% of the vote.|
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 201 (trapping and taking)||Proposition 201 (1994)||Proposition 201 would make it illegal to use certain methods of taking "wildlife" on public land, including federal, state, county and municipal land. The listed devices that would be prohibited are "any leghold trap, any instant kill body gripping design trap, or by a poison or a snare." The measure passed with 58.5% of the vote.|
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 204 (inhumane confinement)||2006 Arizona Proposition 204||This comprises Proposition 204 also known as the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act. A "yes" vote shall have the effect of establishing misdemeanor fines and penalties for tethering or confining a pregnant pig or a calf raised for veal for all or a majority of the day in a manner that prevents the animal from lying down and fully extending its limbs or turning around freely but excepts transportation of the animal, rodeo and fair exhibitions, lawful slaughters, research, veterinary purposes and the seven day period before a pig's expected date of giving birth. The measure passed with 62% voting "yes."|
|AZ - Leash Laws - Article 6. Animal Control.||A. R. S. § 11-1012||
This Arizona laws provides generally that no female dog in her breeding season or vicious dog may be allowed to go at large. It further delineates the state's leash requirements for dogs, including during times of rabies quarantines, in state parks, and at public schools. Exceptions under the law include the training of livestock dogs and hunting dogs, among others.
|AZ - License and Vaccination Ordinances - Exemption of cities, towns and counties (dogs/animals)||A. R. S. § 11-1018||
This Arizona statute exempts cities or towns from the provisions of this article if they impose a license fee and vaccination on dogs by ordinance, provided that such ordinance is equal to or more stringent than the provisions of this article. Further, t he provisions of this article shall not apply to counties which regulate the running at large of dogs in the unincorporated areas of the county by ordinance provided that such ordinance is equal to or more stringent than the provisions of this article.
|AZ - Municipalities - Dog Regulations||A.R.S. § 9-240||This Arizona statute allows common councils to regulate dogs running at large.|
|AZ - Ordinances - Article 2. Board of Trustees Government After Disincorporation.||A. R. S. § 9-219 (repealed 2017)||This Arizona statute provides that the board of trustees of a city may p ass ordinances not inconsistent or in conflict with the laws of this state. More specifically, this statute provides that the board may restrain , under penalties, the running at large of cattle or other animals, and provide rules for impounding them, and provide for taxing dogs and penalties for the nonpayment of such taxes, or the killing of dogs running at large in the corporate limits. However, before exercising these powers, the board shall cause a resolution of intention to be recorded in minutes and then published in some daily or weekly newspaper at least two|
|AZ - Ordinances - Lawful presence on private property defined (dogs)||A. R. S. § 11-1026||
This Arizona statute provides that a person is lawfully on a dog owner's property when he or she is there as an invitee or guest, or when in the performance of a duty imposed upon him by law of the state or United States, or by ordinances of a municipality in which such property is located.
|AZ - Pet Sales - Title 44. Trade and Commerce. Chapter 11. Regulations Concerning Particular Businesses.||A. R. S. 44-1799 - 1799.11||
This Arizona statutory section comprises the state's pet shop laws. The section requires that retail pet sellers provide purchasers a notice of rights that includes a statement of good health signed by a veterinarian. Purchasers have fifteen days to return unhealthy or diseased dogs and receive a refund or compensation for reasonable veterinary expenses.
|AZ - Pet Trusts - Honorary trusts; trusts||A. R. S. § 14-2907; A. R. S. § 14-10408||
This Arizona statute allows for the creation of a trust for a designated domestic or pet animal, and must be performed in 21 years or less. The trust terminates when no living animal is covered by the trust; the remaining property is distributed according to statute and cannot be converted by the trustee.
|AZ - Veterinary - Chapter 21. Veterinarians.||A. R. S. § 32-2201 - 2296||
These are the state's veterinary practice laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, laws concerning the state veterinary board, veterinary records laws, and the laws governing disciplinary actions for impaired or incompetent practitioners.
|AZ - Wildlife - Taking and Handling of Wildlife. Article 1. General Regulations||A. R. S. § 17-301 to 320||
The following statutes comprise Arizona's wildlife code. Among the provisions include methods of taking wildlife, hunting restrictions, the state's hunter interference laws, and laws specific to mountain lions, bears, and jaguars.