ARS 13-2927: Unlawful feeding of wildlife
The complete text of A.R.S. § 13-2927 on unlawful feeding of wildlife, what the State has to prove, and the sentencing range, with a violation charged as a petty offense and exposure reaching a fine with no jail.
As Seen On
Recognized By
What the State Must Prove Under § 13-2927
A.R.S. § 13-2927 is the Arizona statute on unlawful feeding of wildlife. The statute sets out 4 ways the offense can be committed. A violation is a petty offense, depending on the paragraph charged and what the State can prove. The maximum exposure is a fine with no jail.
A. A person commits unlawful feeding of wildlife by intentionally, knowingly or recklessly feeding, attracting or otherwise enticing wildlife into an area, except for:
- Persons lawfully taking or holding wildlife pursuant to title 17 or pursuant to rules or orders of the Arizona game and fish commission.
- Public employees or authorized agents acting within the scope of their authority for public safety or for wildlife management purposes.
- Normal agricultural or livestock operational practices.
- Tree squirrels or birds.
The State must prove every element of the paragraph it actually charged, beyond a reasonable doubt. Which paragraph appears on the complaint decides what the case is about, and it is the first thing to check.
Penalties for a § 13-2927 Conviction
| Class | Maximum jail | Maximum fine |
|---|---|---|
| Petty offense | No jail | $300 |
Felony ranges are set by A.R.S. § 13-702(D) and apply to a first felony conviction that is not dangerous and not repetitive. A dangerous offense (§ 13-704), a repetitive offense (§ 13-703) or a dangerous crime against children (§ 13-705) carries a longer range, and some carry mandatory prison with no probation. Misdemeanor maximums come from §§ 13-707 and 13-802; surcharges are added on top of every fine.
Full Text of A.R.S. § 13-2927
A. A person commits unlawful feeding of wildlife by intentionally, knowingly or recklessly feeding, attracting or otherwise enticing wildlife into an area, except for:
1. Persons lawfully taking or holding wildlife pursuant to title 17 or pursuant to rules or orders of the Arizona game and fish commission.
2. Public employees or authorized agents acting within the scope of their authority for public safety or for wildlife management purposes.
3. Normal agricultural or livestock operational practices.
4. Tree squirrels or birds.
B. This section applies in a county with a population of more than two hundred eighty thousand persons.
C. Unlawful feeding of wildlife is a petty offense.
Source: Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-2927, Arizona Legislative Council revision of 09/19/25. Read the official text on azleg.gov. Statutes change; verify the current version before relying on it.
Related Statutes in Chapter 29 — Offenses Against Public Order
- A.R.S. § 13-2926 — Abandonment or concealment of a dead body
- A.R.S. § 13-2928 — Unlawful stopping to hire and pick up passengers for work
- A.R.S. § 13-2929 — Unlawful transporting, moving, concealing, harboring or shielding of unlawful aliens
- A.R.S. § 13-2924 — Unlawful solicitation of tort victims
- A.R.S. § 13-2930 — Unlawful funeral or burial protest activities
- A.R.S. § 13-2923 — Stalking
- A.R.S. § 13-2922 — Interference with transmissions on public safety land mobile radio frequencies
- A.R.S. § 13-2921 — Harassment
How Tamou Law Group Defends § 13-2927 Cases
A § 13-2927 case is decided by the paragraph the State charged, not by the statute as a whole. We start with the charging document and the disclosure, identify which subsection the prosecutor has to prove, and test whether the evidence actually reaches every element of it. Where the class turns on a fact such as value, an alleged injury, a prior conviction or the identity of the person involved, that fact is frequently the difference between a petty offense and something far less serious, and it is where these cases are won.
We handle unlawful feeding of wildlife cases across Maricopa County and statewide, from our Scottsdale and Phoenix offices. Call 623-321-4699 any time, or read the statute in full above before you speak to anyone about the case.
Awards & Recognition
Our recognition for Phoenix sex crime defense is independently verified, click any award to confirm it:
- National Trial Lawyers Top 100
- National Trial Lawyers Top 40 Under 40
- Elite Lawyer 2026 – Criminal Defense
- Super Lawyers – Southwest
- National College for DUI Defense (NCDD)
When you are looking for the best Phoenix sex crime lawyers, these are the independently verified credentials that matter, earned by Founding Attorney Michael Tamou and a full team of attorneys, including former prosecutors, public defenders, and law enforcement.
What Clients Say About Tamou Law
Real Google reviews from clients we have defended across Phoenix and Maricopa County. Every review is from a criminal defense client, never padded with non-legal work.
Why Tamou Law Group for Violent Crime Charges
Assault, robbery, weapons and threatening cases turn on identification, intent and whether the State can prove what actually happened in a few chaotic seconds. We rebuild those seconds with evidence rather than argument.
Armed robbery dismissed
Our published results include an armed robbery and aggravated assault case dismissed on identification and discovery failures, aggravated assault and weapons charges reduced, and a robbery charge resolved as a misdemeanor. We take these cases to the evidence, not to the first offer.
Former prosecutors and officers
Our team includes former prosecutors and law enforcement officers who have built violent-crime cases for the State. They know how body-camera footage, 911 audio and witness statements are supposed to line up, and how often they do not.
Self-defense and dangerousness
Arizona’s self-defense and dangerous-offense rules decide whether a case means probation or mandatory prison. We litigate the justification question and the dangerousness allegation separately, because each one changes the entire exposure.
Published results in this area
- State v. D.O., Armed robbery and aggravated assault (A.R.S. 13-1904, 13-1204): Dismissed
- State v. Z.E., Aggravated assault, disorderly conduct and threatening (13-1204, 13-2904, 13-1202): Reduced charge
- State v. R.B., Aggravated assault, misconduct involving weapons and endangerment (13-1204, 13-3102, 13-1201): Reduced charge
- State v. E.K., Misconduct involving weapons and disorderly conduct (13-3102, 13-2904): Reduced to a misdemeanor
- State v. R.M., Robbery and theft (13-1902, 13-1802): Reduced to a misdemeanor
- State v. P.A., Disorderly conduct and assault (13-2904, 13-1203): Deferred prosecution
- State v. H.C., Resisting arrest and disorderly conduct (13-2508, 13-2904): Probation, no jail
Anonymized outcomes from our case results page. Every case is different; past results do not guarantee a future outcome.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is A.R.S. § 13-2927?
A.R.S. § 13-2927 is the Arizona statute on unlawful feeding of wildlife. A violation is a petty offense, and which class applies depends on the paragraph charged and the facts the State can prove.
Is a violation of § 13-2927 a felony in Arizona?
No. Under the statute a violation is a petty offense, so the exposure reaches a fine with no jail. The paragraph charged and the facts decide which class applies.
Where can I read the official text of § 13-2927?
The Arizona Legislature publishes it at azleg.gov, in the revision dated 09/19/25. The complete text is reproduced on this page, and every Arizona criminal statute is searchable on our Arizona Criminal Code index.
Two Arizona Offices, One Team
We serve all of Maricopa County and the surrounding area, with free, confidential consultations 24/7 by phone and in-person meetings at either office by appointment.
Case Results Disclaimer: The results described on this page are based on specific facts and circumstances and do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future case. Every case is different. Past results do not guarantee future results. No attorney-client relationship is formed by viewing this page or submitting a contact form until a written fee agreement has been signed. Tamou Law Group, PLLC is licensed to practice law in the State of Arizona. This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.






