The Arizona Public Land Trapping Statute, also known as Proposition 201 was on the November 8, 1994 ballot in Arizona as a citizen-initiated state statute. It was approved.
The measure prohibited the use of leg-hold traps, instant kill body gripping traps, poisons or snares to take wildlife on any public land with exceptions made for uses related to health or safety, scientific research, wildlife relocation or rodent control.
| Arizona Proposition 201 (1994)|
| Yes|| 635,277|| 58.50%|
Official results via: Arizona Secretary of State
Text of measure
The text of the ballot read:
This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.
|| OFFICIAL TITLE
Proposed by initiative petition
Relating to game and fish: defining unlawful methods of taking wildlife; and adding Section 17-301 (D) to Arizona revised statutes to define lawful methods of taking or handling wildlife, specifically banning certain devices, allowing the use of firearms and implements in hand and allowing certain taking and relocation methods and devices.
An act prohibiting the use of leghold traps, instant kill body gripping traps, poisons or snares to take wildlife on any public land, but not affecting hunting and fishing. Such aforementioned devices fould be used for health or safety, scientific research, wildlife relocation or rodent control.
Be it enacted by the People of Arizona:
The following amendments, amending Section 17-301, Arizona Revised Statutes, by the addition of new paragraph 17-301 (D) are proposed to become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors of the State of Arizona voting thereon and proclamation pursuant thereto by the Governor of the State of Arizona.
(1) IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL TO TAKE WILDLIFE WITH ANY LEGHOLD TRAP, ANY INSTANT KILL BODY GRIPPING DESIGN TRAP, OR BY A POISON OR A SNARE ON ANY PUBLIC LAND, INCLUDING STATE OWNED OR STATE LEASED LAND, LANDS ADMINISTERED BY THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, THE STATE PARKS BOARD AND ANY COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY.
(2) SECTION 17-301 (D) (1) ABOVE SHALL NOT PROHIBIT:
(a) THE USE OF THE DEVICES REFERENCED ABOVE BY FEDERAL, STATE, COUNTY, CITY, OR OTHER LOCAL DEPARTMENTS OF HEALTH WHICH HAVE JURISDICTION IN THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF SUCH USE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTION FROM OR SURVEILLANCE FOR THREATS TO HUMAN HEALTH OR SAFETY.
(b) THE TAKING OF WILDLIFE WITH FIREARMS, WITH FISHING EQUIPMENT, WITH ARCHERY EQUIPMENT, OR OTHER IMPLEMENTS IN HAND AS MAY BE DEFINED OR REGULATED BY THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE TAKING OF WILDLIFE PURSUANT TO A HUNTING OR FISHING LICENSE ISSUED BY THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT.
(c) THE USE OF SNARES, TRAPS NOT DESIGNED TO KILL, OR NETS TO TAKE WILDLIFE FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH PROJECTS, FALCONRY, OR FOR RELOCATION OF THE WILDLIFE AS MAY BE DEFINED OR REGULATED BY THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION AND OR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
(d) THE USE OF POISONS OR NETS BY THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT TO TAKE OR MANAGE AQUATIC WILDLIFE AS DETERMINED AND REGULATED BY THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION.
(e) THE USE OF TRAPS FOR RODENT CONTROL OR POISONS FOR RODENT CONTROL FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONTROLLING WILD AND DOMESTIC RODENTS AS OTHERWISE ALLOWED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA, EXCLUDING ANY FURBEARERS AS DEFINED IN A.R.S. 17-101, B(5).
Note: Deleted language is crossed out, added language is capitalized.
- Help Abolish Leghold Traps
- Arizona Lobby For Animals
- Kachina Animal Hospital
- Arizona Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc.
- Wildlife Damage Review
- Hunters and Fishers for an Environmental Ethic
- The Arizona Animal Welfare League, Inc.
- Rincon Group, Sierra Club
Arguments in favor of the amendment included:
- Leghold traps and similar devices pose a threat to individuals and animals on public lands.
- The initiative will not ban these devices and methods on privately owned land.
Those in opposition included:
- Arizona Cattlemen's Association
- Arizona Farm Bureau Federation
Arguments against the amendment included:
- The ban would cause cattle deaths to predators to increase, effectively raising the price of beef for consumers.
State of Arizona 1994 Ballot Propositions Guide
Arizona Department of State official website