Problem Solving
Is It Illegal to Feed Raccoons?
Not in most states or provinces. Florida's rule names raccoons, but only where the feeding becomes a public nuisance. Arizona and Illinois catch them under general wildlife rules. The other bans are city codes, and four we read reach your backyard.
The short answer
- Florida is the only state rule we read that names raccoons. It bans food that attracts coyotes, foxes or raccoons and creates, or is likely to create, a public nuisance. First offense: a $100 civil penalty.
- Arizona bans feeding any wild mammal in counties of more than 280,000 people. Birds and tree squirrels are exempt; raccoons are not.
- Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, Rhode Island and California have feeding laws that list other animals, not raccoons. Oregon's 2013 bill to add raccoons died in a House committee.
- Bellingham and Anacortes, Washington, Toronto, and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia ban raccoon feeding on private property. All four still allow bird feeders, with conditions.
- Every bird feeder exemption is for birds. A feeder a raccoon empties nightly can fall outside it.
Not in most of the US and Canada. Florida is the only state rule we read that names raccoons, and it applies only when the food creates a public nuisance. Arizona bans feeding any wild mammal in its large counties, and Illinois bans feeding wildlife where deer live. Every other ban that names raccoons is a city or town code.
We read twelve rules: eight state or provincial and four local, ten of them in the rule text. If a raccoon is raiding your feeder, the fix is on keeping raccoons off bird feeders. Trapping and moving one is on the relocation page.
The rules we read#
For your own yard, read the "Your backyard" column first.
| Place | Rule | Raccoons covered? | Your backyard | Penalty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | Fla. Admin. Code 68A-4.001(3) | Yes, by name, if it creates a public nuisance | Covered | $100 first; then a second-degree misdemeanor |
| Arizona | ARS 13-2927 | Yes: all wild mammals | Covered in counties over 280,000 people | Petty offense |
| Illinois | 17 Ill. Adm. Code 635.40 | Yes, where wild deer are present | Hand feeding with cleanup, or a feeder deer cannot reach, exempt | Not in the section |
| Oregon | ORS 496.731 | No: bear, cougar, coyote, wolf | Not covered | None for raccoons |
| Washington | RCW 77.15.790 | No: large wild carnivores | Not covered by state law | None for raccoons |
| California | 14 CCR 251.3 | No: big game only | Not covered | None for raccoons |
| Rhode Island | Title 20 (DEM leaflet) | No: waterfowl, turkey, deer, black bear, coyote | Not covered | None for raccoons |
| British Columbia | Wildlife Act, s. 33.1 | No: "dangerous wildlife" only | Not covered, unless a coyote or bear can reach it | None for raccoons |
| Bellingham, Washington | Municipal Code 7.12.130 (2017) | Yes, by name | Covered; food for wild birds and pets excluded | Infraction, up to $250 |
| Anacortes, Washington | Wild animal feeding ordinance (April 23, 2026) | Yes, by name | Covered; bird feeders allowed | $25 plus court costs, then $50 |
| Toronto, Ontario | Municipal Code ch. 349, s. 349-10.1 (April 1, 2023) | Yes: all wildlife | Covered; songbird feeders exempt on four conditions | Up to $100,000 on conviction |
| Yarmouth, Nova Scotia | Feeding Wild Animals Bylaw (2022, amended October 9, 2025) | Yes, by name | Covered; songbird and hummingbird feeders on five conditions | $50 to $1,000 |
Six of the twelve reach a raccoon fed in a backyard, seven where Illinois deer live. The five that do not each name the animals they do cover.
Why the answers online disagree#
Search the question and you get two answers: illegal because raccoons carry disease, or legal everywhere. Neither holds.
"Raccoons carry disease, so feeding them is illegal." Disease is why agencies tell you not to; the CDC says "Do not keep, feed, or adopt wild animals, including raccoons, as pets." But advice is not a ban, and the state laws that list species stop at bears, cougars, coyotes, wolves, deer and waterfowl. Oregon tested it: its 2013 Senate Bill 474 would have changed the state's list of "potentially habituated wildlife" from "bear, cougar, coyote and wolf" to "bear, cougar, coyote, raccoon and wolf." Northwest News Network reported that it passed the Senate 16 to 14, with one senator who fed raccoons about 50 pounds of food every two weeks telling colleagues, "Don't make me a criminal." The Legislature's record shows it dying in the House Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources.
"It's legal everywhere." That comes from real cases. In 2024 a woman near Poulsbo, Washington called 911 after 50 to 100 raccoons she had been feeding surrounded her house and car. The Associated Press reported that the sheriff's office and the state Department of Fish and Wildlife "determined no laws were broken," and that state law bans feeding only large carnivores, "such as bears or cougars." Idaho Fish and Game said the same about Idaho in 2013. True for those states' laws; wrong in Florida, Arizona, and Bellingham, Washington, whose city code names raccoons.
Florida: raccoons by name, with a nuisance test#
Florida's general prohibitions rule, in the version effective July 31, 2026, says in subsection (3):
"Intentionally placing food or garbage, allowing the placement of food or garbage, or offering food or garbage in such a manner that it attracts coyotes, foxes or raccoons and in a manner that is likely to create or creates a public nuisance is prohibited."
Two things have to be true. The food has to attract one of the three animals, and it has to create a public nuisance or be likely to. The bear rule in the same section has no such test: "intentionally feeding bears is prohibited." The rule does not define "public nuisance," so how many raccoons it takes is left to the officer and the court.
It also covers "allowing the placement" of food, not just placing it on purpose, so seed spilled under a feeder or a pet bowl left out is within its words if raccoons come and a nuisance results. The crane rule counts only intentional feeding.
The penalty is in section 379.412 of the Florida Statutes. A first violation is a noncriminal infraction with a $100 civil penalty, payable within 30 days. A second or later one, for wildlife other than bears or crocodilians, is a second-degree misdemeanor: up to 60 days (s. 775.082) and $500 (s. 775.083). Raccoon cases never climb to a felony; bear cases can.
Arizona and Illinois: raccoons as "wildlife"#
Arizona. ARS 13-2927 makes it a petty offense to commit "unlawful feeding of wildlife by intentionally, knowingly or recklessly feeding, attracting or otherwise enticing wildlife into an area." Wildlife means "all wild mammals, wild birds" and more, and the exception is only for "tree squirrels or birds," so raccoons are in. It "applies in a county with a population of more than two hundred eighty thousand persons." Watch the word "recklessly": refilling a ground tray that raccoons empty every night is arguably attracting wildlife the bird exemption does not cover. No court decision we read settles it. The pigeon page reads the same statute for birds.
Illinois. 17 Ill. Adm. Code 635.40 makes it "illegal to make available food, salt, mineral blocks or other products for ingestion by wild deer or other wildlife in areas where wild deer are present." Raccoons are other wildlife. The exemptions cover "elevated bird/squirrel feeders" (food "for birds or squirrels" only), feeding animals other than deer "by hand" with cleanup, and "feeders for wildlife other than deer so long as deer are excluded" by fencing or other barriers.
So in Illinois deer country, dog food for raccoons on an open lawn breaks the rule; behind a deer fence it does not. Other deer rules are on does a deer feeding ban apply to my bird feeder.
Laws that stop at bears and coyotes#
Most state and provincial feeding laws were written for animals that can hurt someone. Read the species list first.
Oregon. ORS 496.731 lets an officer order anyone who leaves food "so as to knowingly constitute a lure" for "bear, cougar, coyote and wolf" to remove it "within two days of notification." Raccoons are the animal the 2013 bill failed to add.
Washington. RCW 77.15.790 says a person "may not negligently feed or attempt to feed large wild carnivores or negligently attract large wild carnivores to land or a building." Negligence is enough, but raccoons are not large carnivores. How it plays out with feeders is on bear feeder laws.
British Columbia. Section 33.1 of the Wildlife Act bans feeding "dangerous wildlife," meaning "bear, cougar, coyote or wolf" or a prescribed species, and leaving attractants where they could attract it and "be accessible to dangerous wildlife." No raccoon. But the attractant rule needs no intent, so a dish put out for raccoons where people are likely to be, and where a coyote could reach it, can still break it. BC's towns and fines are on are bird feeders illegal in Canada.
Rhode Island has the broadest list we found: "feeding wild waterfowl, wild turkey, wild cervids, black bear, or coyote is not permitted any time in the state." No raccoon. See the duck page and the turkey page.
California. 14 CCR 251.3 bans knowingly feeding "big game mammals," which section 350 defines as deer, elk, pronghorn, black bear and Nelson bighorn sheep. The same rule is misread as a squirrel ban; see the squirrel page.
Bellingham and Anacortes#
Bellingham's code section 7.12.130, "Feeding of deer and raccoons prohibited" (Ordinance 2017-10-024), says a person commits an offense "if the person intentionally feeds deer or raccoons, or makes food available for consumption by said animals on private or public property." Two subsections pull against each other:
- Subsection C: a person "shall be presumed to have intentionally fed deer or raccoons" if they place food "on the ground outdoors or in any outdoor area reachable by these animals."
- Subsection F: feeding deer or raccoons "does not include a person placing food on a public or private property for the purpose of feeding domestic livestock, pets, or wild birds."
Seed in a bird feeder, or a bowl for your cat, is outside the rule by its purpose. Food on the ground, without that purpose, is presumed to be raccoon feeding. The penalty is an infraction with a fine "not to exceed $250.00."
Anacortes adopted its ban unanimously on April 23, 2026. The mayor's announcement says "wild animal" includes "all deer, squirrels, racoons, seagulls, and pigeons," and that "bird feeders are still allowed; salt licks are not." A first violation is a class 4 civil infraction, $25 plus court costs; a second is a class 3 infraction, $50. Its gull side is on the seagull page.
Toronto and Yarmouth#
Toronto's section 349-10.1 has said since April 1, 2023: "No person shall feed or attempt to feed wildlife, or permit the feeding of wildlife on their property." Wildlife is any animal "that belongs to a species that is wild by nature" apart from domestic animals and stray cats, so raccoons are in. Songbird feeders are exempt only on four conditions, the first being a device "sufficiently above grade so as to not attract or be accessible to wildlife." A feeder a raccoon climbs to every night fails that by its own record. The maximum fine is $100,000. All four conditions are on the squirrel page.
Yarmouth, Nova Scotia's Feeding Wild Animals Bylaw (adopted January 13, 2022, amended October 9, 2025) opens: "No person shall feed one or more deer, raccoons, or any other wild animals" in a way that "causes or may cause an unreasonable interference" with someone else's property. Then, more plainly:
- "No person shall feed any wildlife or wild animal on private or public property."
- "No person shall place any food, pet food or feeding device on any property in a manner that attracts wildlife or a wild animal."
- "No person shall feed any bird other than a Songbird or Hummingbird."
A songbird is an oscine bird "but does not include crows, pigeons or seagulls," fed with permission from a device "sufficiently above grade as to not attract or be accessible by wildlife," with spill removed "forthwith." Fines run from $50 to $1,000. Note "pet food": cat food raccoons eat on the porch is an offense in Yarmouth; Bellingham excludes it.
Your bird feeder under these rules#
None of the twelve rules bans bird feeders. Several stop protecting one once raccoons use it, through three tests:
- Purpose. Bellingham asks what the food was for. Seed in a feeder passes. Seed thrown on the ground, or a ground feeder at lawn level, runs into the presumption in subsection C.
- Access. Toronto and Yarmouth judge the result. If raccoons can reach the feeder, it is not "sufficiently above grade." The pole and baffle specifications for raccoons are stricter than for squirrels; baffles covers sizing.
- Nuisance. Florida counts food you "allow" to be placed. Spill is how a bird feeder gets there; see seed mess and dead grass.
The cheapest way to pass all three is the same thing that ends raccoon raids: bring the feeders in at dusk. A feeder indoors from sunset to sunrise gives raccoons nothing to find. Keep seed in a metal can with a latching lid (see storing bird seed), and take pet food in before dark. Not sure what is emptying it? Start with who emptied my feeder overnight.
Food that draws raccoons also draws rats, and in bear country it draws bears, where the stricter state laws apply. The CDC adds a health reason: raccoon roundworm eggs in raccoon feces become infectious after two to four weeks, and "most infections are in children and others who are more likely to put dirt or animal waste in their mouth by mistake."
Where this page stops applying#
- Other towns. Search your town's code for "feeding of wildlife," "wild animal" and "raccoon," then check the definition of "wildlife." How to find a code: neighbors and ordinances.
- Codes we could not read. Pacific Grove, California; Hillsborough, North Carolina; Eatontown, New Jersey; and Vancouver refused our requests. Richmond Heights, Ohio exists only as an unsigned copy. None is in the table.
- Two rows are not from rule text. Anacortes is from the mayor's announcement; Rhode Island from the state leaflet, section number not located.
- Idaho is from a 2013 news report; we did not read its code.
- British Columbia can prescribe more "dangerous wildlife" by regulation; we did not read the regulations.
- Penalties for Illinois are not in the section we read. Florida's rule does not define "public nuisance."
- Parks have their own rules, and most ban feeding any wildlife.
- Other states and provinces, including New York, Texas and Ontario, we did not read.
This is a reading of statutes, regulations and bylaws, not legal advice.
Frequently asked questions#
Is it illegal to feed raccoons in Florida?
Yes, if it creates a public nuisance. Florida's rule 68A-4.001(3) bans placing, allowing the placement of, or offering food that attracts coyotes, foxes or raccoons in a way that creates or is likely to create a public nuisance. A first violation carries a $100 civil penalty; later ones are second-degree misdemeanors.
Is it illegal to feed raccoons in Washington State?
Not under state law, which bans feeding large carnivores such as bears and cougars. Some cities ban it: Bellingham's code names deer and raccoons (fine up to $250), and Anacortes's 2026 ordinance names raccoons too. Both allow bird feeders.
Is it illegal to feed raccoons in Oregon?
Not under state law. ORS 496.731 covers bears, cougars, coyotes and wolves. A 2013 bill to add raccoons, Senate Bill 474, passed the Senate 16 to 14 and died in a House committee.