Daily Smile

[{"type":"text","text":"Tom and Jerry crew on a lunch break..."}]

Smile 11 23 24

Cowboy State Daily is Wyoming’s largest newspaper with Wyoming’s most experienced journalists. 

<title>Daily Smile: Saturday, November 23, 2024 | Cowboy State Daily</title>

Tom and Jerry crew on a lunch break...

Daily Smile: Saturday, November 23, 2024

Headshot of Cowboy State Daily's general assignment reporter, Clair McFarland.

Clair McFarland

Government & Politics

A federal judge declined Thursday to make Wyoming and Nebraska irrigation districts open a competitive bid for the sake of a drilling company that missed out on the chance to bid a $100 million job on the Goshen County tunnel project.

But the judge also ruled that Drill Tech Drilling & Shoring Inc. 

, at this phase, in claiming that the Wyoming-based Goshen County Irrigation and Nebraska-based Gering-Fort Laramie Irrigation Districts violated their states’ public-records laws by not giving information the company had requested.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Lock In"}]

Drill Tech Drilling & Shoring Inc. filed a federal lawsuit against both districts in May.

The lawsuit asked U.S. District Court Judge Scott Skavdahl, of Wyoming, to intervene in what Drill Tech called an unlawful bidding process that cut it out of the opportunity to win a job on the massive tunnel repair.

One of the two 119-year-old tunnels suffered a catastrophic failure in 2019. The other is reportedly in dire need of a rebuild.

The districts assigned Atkinson Construction LLC as construction manager at-risk (CMAR) over the project, which means Atkinson can oversee and work with subcontractors, court documents say.

Drill Tech alleged that for the $100 million drill project it had sought to perform, the irrigation districts should have held — and didn’t hold — a competitive bidding process. The districts gave the job instead to their CMAR, Atkinson, court documents say.

[{"type":"text","text":"In his Thursday order, Skavdahl countered. "}]

He said the laws of both Wyoming and Nebraska appear to support the CMAR’s authority to self-perform this kind of work. Drill Tech has not shown substantially that it has a right to enter a competitive bidding process for this project, he added.

Skavdahl wrote that requiring the districts to pause or backtrack their work and hold that bidding process could harm the agricultural community by stalling the long-awaited repairs even longer — and he declined to do that.

The public has an interest in government entities abiding by the open bidding process, wrote Skavdahl.

“On the other hand, the Irrigation Districts are right that ensuring irrigation water to the thousands of acres of farmland served by the tunnels is also in the public interest,” he added. “In light of Drill Tech’s failures (to show it deserves court intervention) as well as the serious risks to the farmers and public from another tunnel collapse following any delay in this construction project, the preliminary injunction requested by Drill Tech is more contrary to the public interest than in support of it.”

Drill Tech had waited several months to sue, though it had reportedly learned it had been cut out of the job last summer, Skavdahl noted.

He declined to let that delay kill the case altogether, but he factored the delay into his decision not to order the open bid.

The judge’s order doesn’t end the case. It just denies Drill Tech’s request to have Skavdahl intervene in this early phase.

Skavdahl gave his early conjectures that Drill Tech isn’t likely to win on the bidding question, only for the purposes of declining to compel the districts to change course immediately.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Might Win That One"}]

Drill Tech had also accused both irrigation districts of violating their states’ open meeting laws and assigning the job in secret.

[{"type":"text","text":"Skavdahl said the company looks unlikely to win that challenge as well."}]

But, the judge wrote, Drill tech appears likely to win two of its claims: that the Wyoming irrigation district and the Nebraska one both violated their states’ public-records laws by not giving Drill Tech information it had requested.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Background"}]

The complaint says the two districts contracted Atkinson to be the construction manager at risk and provide oversight for the Fort Laramie Canal Tunnel 1 and 2 rehabilitation project.

That project is expected to benefit more than 100,000 acres of farmland across eastern Wyoming and western Nebraska.

 that the U.S. Department of Interior has chosen to use $100 million of its $889 million One Big Beautiful Bill appropriation on the tunnel project.

The tunnel collapsed July 17, 2019, cutting off irrigation water to the region and flooding fields. The infrastructure was more than a century old.

Temporary repairs restored most of the system’s capacity in time for the 2021 season, but it still needs long-term solutions. Repairs to Tunnel 2 also are in the works so that it doesn’t suffer the same catastrophic failure.

During the bidding process, Drill Tech’s complaint alleges, the two irrigation districts confirmed Atkinson would have to comply with Wyoming and Nebraska laws, and that it may be able to self-perform the construction work in the project, but would competitively bid that work.

But 18 months after Atkinson became the project manager, the districts “fundamentally changed the (manager’s) agreement to allow Atkinson to self-perform all the construction work for the Project under the guise of a contract amendment,” the complaint alleges.

This transformed the contract into a standard prime contract for the massive project “with no competition for the construction work,” says Drill Tech’s complaint. 

The project manager no longer had to open competition to the public bidding process, it adds.

Drill Tech Drilling and other interested parties were cut out of the process, the complaint says.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Asking For Documents"}]

Drill Tech didn’t ask to become the project manager because it wanted to work on the tunnel rehabilitation work packages instead, the complaint says, adding that Drill Tech has experience with the method that project requires.

On July 25, 2025, Drill Tech sent a letter to the two districts, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and one of the project designers, HDR Inc., to raise concerns that Atkinson was no longer required to bid projects competitively and in public.

Drill Tech noted in that letter that it had been monitoring the project for two years, waiting for the bid advertisement.

Nearly a month later, the Goshen County Irrigation District’s attorney acknowledged the district had received the letter and thanked Drill Tech for its “continued interest in the Project,” court documents say.

That December, Drill Tech submitted public-records requests to both districts under the public-records laws of each state, the complaint says, asking for all post-award modifications and amendments regarding the project manager’s agreement, and for a copy of the procurement plan.

The Nebraska-based district never responded to that request, the complaint says. The Wyoming-based district reportedly responded two months later, Feb. 10, 2026.

Goshen District’s public records yield was “heavily redacted,” says Drill Tech’s complaint. The district claimed those redactions were justified as trade secrets, privileged information, confidential commercial, financial, geographical or geophysical data.

The complaint disputes that. It shows a side-by-side comparison of the same page of the scope of the project manager’s services.

The page that was publicly released in the request for proposal, and the page Drill Tech received in its public records request, are vastly different, with the latter about 75% or more redacted.

“Reactions such as these were pervasive” throughout the agreement, the complaint says.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Transparency"}]

Copies of the changes to that agreement also had “pervasive redactions,” it adds.

Still, says the document, Drill Tech learned that the agreement was amended before Drill Tech’s July 25, 2025, letter requesting information about whether public bids were still required.

The complaint says the district knew the agreement had already been changed to edge out competitive bidding, but didn’t tell Drill Tech that when the company asked.

The complaint also says the district didn’t provide notice of an important public meeting.

By Feb. 20, 2025, the Goshen district board voiced concerns about HDR’s original maximum price estimate of $87 million swelling to more than $120 million, the complaint relates from the meeting minutes.

HDR proposed a confidential guaranteed maximum price proposal and non-disclosure agreements so there would be “no worry about (Atkinson) getting underbid,” the document alleges.

There was, the complaint says, no documented vote for Atkinson to self-perform the task they were discussing without publicly bidding the work packages, but the district did vote to approve changing the design plan.

It’s “entirely” unclear what role the Nebraska-based district played here because it didn’t respond to Drill Tech’s public records requests, the complaint alleges.

The document says that on July 8, 2025, the Goshen district and Atkinson signed an amendment to change the agreement, so that the latter was no longer required to advertise bids or publicly open them.

In the July 17, 2025, meeting minutes, “Atkinson was already apparently working with a vendor for the digger shield, but there was no indication that Atkinson has publicly bid or competitively awarded the subcontract for the digger shield.”

Irrigation Tunnel Gary Stone Nebraska Extension 5 4 26

<title>Judge Says $100M Goshen Tunnel Project Won’t Stop For Company That Couldn't Bid | Cowboy State Daily</title>

A federal judge declined Thursday to pause the $100 million Goshen Tunnel project for a company that missed out on a chance to bid on the work. He also ruled the company has a valid case against two irrigation districts in charge of the tunnel.

Judge Says $100M Goshen Tunnel Project Won’t Stop For Company That Couldn't Bid

Headshot of Cowboy State Daily's Feature Reporter, Andrew Rossi.

Andrew Rossi

Wildlife

Wildlife photographer Julie Argyle was watching a wolf tear apart a waterlogged bison carcass in Yellowstone National Park's Hayden Valley this week when she noticed something unsettling. 

The wolf didn’t seem able to enjoy the free meal, despite no other wolves, grizzlies, or other animals in the vicinity. 

[{"type":"text","text":"Instead, it kept glancing upward. "}]

“He was irritated, agitated, or however you want to describe it,” she said. “Something kept scaring that wolf.”

Other observers thought the wolf was watching eagles soaring over the carcass. Argyle was skeptical, as wolves don’t respond to natural stimuli that way.

Then she saw what she suspected was the source of the wolf’s concern: A drone.

“It was hovering right over the wolf and kept going in,” she said. “It ended up getting too close and scaring the wolf, and it took off and hid in the trees.”

Argyle watched the drone attempt to pursue the fleeing wolf before it soared high into a cloudy sky. There was no way to follow it back to its pilot, despite several observes and Yellowstone rangers attempting to do so.

She later learned that a fellow wildlife photographer had seen the same drone at the same spot earlier that day. A grizzly that was feeding on the carcass when the drone got too close and scared it off, just like it had with the wolf.

For Argyle, it was another infuriating incident of drones disturbing Yellowstone’s wildlife.

“That drone was definitely too close, and it's not OK,” she said. "I don't get why people do it."

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Droning On"}]

[{"type":"text","text":"Flying drones in Yellowstone, or any national park, is illegal."}]

The National Park Service (NPS) categorizes drones as “uncrewed aircraft,” and they are completely prohibited within the boundaries of every NPS site. Piloting a private drone without authorization is a misdemeanor carrying a maximum penalty of six months in jail and/or a $5,000 fine.

None of this has stopped people from piloting drones in Yellowstone. Argyle, who works as Lake Village’s postmaster, is seeing them increasingly often.

“This is the fourth drone incident that I have seen in the last five weeks, and I was aware of the incident of the drone harassing the grizzly sow and cubs near Grizzly Lake,” she said.

 of three grizzlies. The grizzlies didn’t seem overly bothered, but visitors in the vicinity were immediately outraged.

“I believe they found out who that person was by social media, but I don't know that there’s anything they can do about it once they’re out of the park,” Argyle said.

Being obstructed, harassed, or scared by tourists has become an occupational hazard for Yellowstone’s wildlife. Drones, in Argyle’s opinion, are much different – and much worse.

“Drones are much more invasive,” she said. “I knew that wolf was watching and being scared off by a drone before I saw the drone.”

Argyle was watching the wolf through her spotting scope 354 yards away. The drone was much closer than the 100 yards visitors are asked to keep between themselves and Yellowstone’s bears and wolves.

[{"type":"text","text":"However, Argyle said, “It’s not always about the yards.”"}]

“It’s about what you’re doing to change that animal’s behavior,” she said. “The park tries to stop people from encroaching on the landscape to protect the flora and fauna. The drone pilot might have been 100 yards away from that wolf, but the drone wasn’t.”

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"It’s OK To Call 911"}]

When someone spots something suspicious or illegal occurring in any national park, the NPS encourages witnesses to report it immediately.

The number for the official NPS tip line is (888) 653-0009. Tips can also be submitted online or via email.

[{"type":"text","text":"The other option, for immediate reporting, is to dial 911."}]

Most people are inherently nervous about dialing 911 except in extreme emergencies. Because flying drones in a national park is illegal, using 911 to report a drone is a perfectly viable option.

“I’d encourage people to call 911,” Argyle said. “Most people don't have an NPS dispatch number. If you see someone disturbing or encroaching on an animal with a drone, I would say that that's a situation where 911 should be called.”

Argyle admitted she “wasn’t an expert,” but she spoke from experience. She’s dialed 911 to report illegal drones in the past, and it has resulted in rangers finding and fining the pilots.

[{"type":"text","text":"“I think it's important to call it in,” she said."}]

In June 2025, a California man scared two osprey off their nest by flying a drone too close.  The NPS confirmed the tourist was 

, and the osprey eventually returned to their nest.

For anyone reluctant to call 911, Argyle said the best thing they can do is thoroughly document the incident and share that information with a law enforcement ranger.

“Take photos and videos of the drone harassing wildlife,” she said. “If you see the drone returning to a person or vehicle, take a picture of that, too. You can always contact a ranger and give them that information, and they'll take it.”

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"What’s The Point?"}]

Setting aside the legalities of flying drones in Yellowstone, Argyle can’t wrap her head around the rationale for it. If they want to observe or capture wild animals in their elements, drones do the opposite.

“As a wildlife photographer, I never want an animal to be on edge,” she said. “I want to see its natural behavior in its natural setting, not scared and running away with its tail tucked between its legs. That’s what drones do.”

In September 2025, Argyle got photos and videos of 

 out of a muddy pond. She got them by exercising patience and restraint from a distance over several days, so the scene could play out without interference.

“My favorite shots are when the animals aren't paying attention to me,” she said. “They’re always aware that people are there. That can't be helped, but I prefer the animal to be relaxed and doing what it's doing rather than watching what I'm doing.”

Drones are the irritating antithesis of this ethos, and they're getting worse over time, she said. In Argyle’s opinion, the best solution is to catch drone pilots in the act and ensure they’re identified and reported.

Yellowstone wolf harassed by drone 7 3 26

<title>Wolf Harassed Off Bison Carcass In Latest Yellowstone Illegal Drone Intrusion | Cowboy State Daily</title>

A wolf was trying to feed on a bison carcass in Yellowstone this week when it was harassed by a drone. “It was hovering right over the wolf and kept going in,” said a wildlife photographer who got video of the encounter.

Wolf Harassed Off Bison Carcass In Latest Yellowstone Illegal Drone Intrusion

Heinz mark

Mark Heinz

A northern Colorado rancher who lives near one of the state’s reintroduced wolf packs said she and her neighbors are becoming increasingly frustrated because when wolves aren’t threatening livestock, coyotes are.

Amanda Cerveny said she spotted and took video of a lone canine crossing her property near cattle.

She thought at first it could have been a small or young wolf, but also thought it might be a coyote.

Her latter suspicions were confirmed by biologist Doug Smith, who texted “100% coyote” to Cowboy State Daily after viewing Cerveny’s video.

Cerveny told Cowboy State Daily after seeing the first coyote she returned to her house to retrieve her rifle.

As in Wyoming, it’s legal to shoot coyotes on sight to protect livestock.

By the time she returned, the animal was gone.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"textStyle"},{"type":"bold"}],"text":"‘Two Knuckleheads’"}]

A short while later while walking down a lane on her property, “that’s when I saw these two knuckleheads attacking a calf," she said.

About 250 yards away, Cerveny saw two canines chasing and harassing one of her neighbor’s calves. She took video of that scene as well.

At the time, she was reasonably confident those two canines were coyotes.

But, as she noted, in Colorado, anything less than 100% certainty over whether the critter is a coyote or a wolf can be good reason to hold your fire.

"At 250 yards, how can I be absolutely certain whether it’s a coyote, or an uncollared wolf pup, or yearling?” she said.

Smith, who led the wolf program in Yellowstone National Park for nearly three decades, told Cowboy State Daily this year’s wolf pups wouldn’t leave the immediate area of the den this early in the year.

Pups don’t usually start venturing out until September or October, he said.

However, “come winter or fall,” it might be difficult to discern a coyote from a wolf pup at a great distance, he added.

Cerveny said her hesitancy to open fire on the canines she saw harassing the neighbor’s calves, even at a time when she could be reasonably sure they were coyotes, is indicative of the quandary she said she and her neighbors face.

Wolves remain protected in Colorado, and killing one, even by accident, could result in thousands of dollars in fines, Cerveny said.

It is legal for Colorado ranchers to shoot wolves if they catch them “directly in the act” of attacking cattle, she said.

But in most cases, the burden of proof is so high, ranchers might hesitate. And in her case, she said, it caused her to not even shoot at coyotes.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"textStyle"},{"type":"bold"}],"text":"‘More Aggressive’"}]

Cerveny said that as far as she knows, her neighbor’s calf wasn’t seriously. Even so, she worries coyotes getting away with attacking a calf might embolden them to keep doing so.

Cerveny said that she, her husband and others in the area think that coyotes might be getting "more aggressive."

She said she showed the video of the coyotes attacking the calf to her husband.

“He said, ‘in 30 years of doing this (ranching) I’ve never seen anything like that',” she said.

There have always been instances of coyotes darting in to attack a sick or wounded calf, or “going after the afterbirth” during calving season, she said.

But nobody in the area seems to recall many instances of coyotes, which are usually opportunistic hunters, going directly after healthy livestock.

Smith said coyotes generally favor small prey, such as rodents. They do tend to “hunt in pairs” and will on rare occasions go after something bigger, such as sheep or a calf, he said.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"textStyle"},{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Are Wolves To Blame?"}]

Cerveny said she and her neighbors wonder if coyotes are more aggressively going after cattle “because of competition from wolves” for other prey.

Smith said that almost certainly isn’t the case.

“Coyotes do what coyotes do, and wolves do what wolves do," he said. "They’ve lived alongside each other for hundreds of thousands of years. One doesn’t force the other to do anything.” 

Smith added that wolves returning to an area where they’ve been absent for a while, such as Colorado, doesn’t change that dynamic.

“Pull them (wolves) away for a few decades, and that’s not really going to change coyote psyche and behavior,” Smith said. “It’s the ghost of evolution past."

Wolves are thought to have wandered into Colorado from Wyoming and formed a pack in about 2020.

The state also began reintroducing wolves in December 2023.

Smith said elk might leave an area this time of year to move to higher elevations, and leave both coyotes and wolves in the low country.

But as he sees it, both canine species can get by without elk.

Outside of rarely taking an calf, coyotes don’t rely on elk as a prey source, he said. And wolves’ dependence upon elk might also be greatly overestimated.

Wolves are actually lousy elk hunters, Smith said, succeeding only about 5% to 15% of the time they set out to kill elk.

When elk leave an area, it’s probably not because wolves scared them, Smith said.

“Elk stay where they want to stay because of food,” he said. “They aren’t hype-afraid of wolves, because if they encounter a wolf they’re likely to live.”

Coyotes and wolves 7 3 26

<title>Rancher Says Wolves Making Colorado Coyotes More Aggressive With Livestock | Cowboy State Daily</title>

Ranchers in northern Colorado wonder if the growing wolf population is causing coyotes to be more aggressive toward livestock. "In 30 years of doing this, I’ve never seen anything like that," a rancher said about two coyotes attacking healthy livestock.

Rancher Says Wolves Making Colorado Coyotes More Aggressive With Livestock

Kolby fedore

Kolby Fedore

Crime & Courts

Courts

A Florida woman who owned a behavioral health clinic in Cheyenne has been ordered to pay back more than $870,000 to Wyoming Medicaid for bilking the federal agency with fraudulent claims.

Federal prosecutors say her daughter helped carry out the scheme by assisting with billing and falsifying service documentation while working for the clinic.

Tera Marie Campbell, 47, of Maitland, Florida, owned The Olive Branch LLC, a behavioral health clinic that provided autism services in Cheyenne and Minot, North Dakota, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming said Thursday in a statement announcing the women’s sentences for conspiracy to commit health care fraud.

Campbell used the business to submit fraudulent Medicaid claims over several years, including claims for services provided by employees who lacked required certifications, claims that were upcoded to higher-paying services and bills for appointments that never occurred, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Investigators said some of those claims were submitted for dates when the clinic was closed and even while Campbell was out of the country on vacation.

Campbell's daughter, Tayler Ann Krauss, 27, of McDavid, Florida, worked as the clinic's medical biller between December 2020 and October 2022. She was instrumental in providing service documentation used to support fraudulent claims.

The investigation concluded the clinic relied extensively on untrained employees, falsified certification and supervision records, and knowingly billed Wyoming Medicaid for services that did not meet Medicaid requirements, according to prosecutors.

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Joint Investigation"}]

The case was investigated by the Wyoming Attorney General's Office Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Defense's Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

U.S. Attorney Darin Smith said in a statement that Medicaid fraud "steals taxpayer dollars from programs that millions of Americans depend on and undermines care for vulnerable patients.

"I am committed to holding accountable those who exploit these programs for personal gain."

Smith said his office will continue working with federal and state partners to investigate and prosecute health care fraud, saying the effort is aimed at protecting public resources and preserving confidence in the healthcare system.

Wyoming Attorney General Keith Kautz added in the statement that the prosecution and conviction of Campbell and Krauss demonstrates the value of cooperation between state and federal law enforcement agencies and praised the work of his office's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit.

Smith nor Kautz responded to Cowboy State Daily's request for an interview beyond the prepared statements released by the U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday. 

[{"type":"text","marks":[{"type":"bold"}],"text":"Sentence Handed Down"}]

U.S. District Judge Kelly H. Rankin sentenced Krauss on Monday and Campbell on Tuesday in federal court in Cheyenne.

Campbell and Krauss were indicted May 21, 2025, and both pleaded guilty April 9 to conspiracy to commit health care fraud.

Campbell was sentenced to 36 months in federal prison followed by three years of supervised release. Krauss was sentenced to two years of home confinement.

The judge ordered the women to jointly pay $735,717.63 in restitution to Wyoming Medicaid. Campbell was also ordered to repay $135,890.91 to the military's Tricare health care program.

The court ruled Krauss is jointly responsible for up to $71,509.44 of that amount.

Campbell was separately sentenced in January in a related North Dakota Medicaid fraud case.

In that case, she received a three-year suspended sentence, three years of supervised release and was ordered to repay an additional $225,000 to North Dakota's Medicaid program.

Federal courthouse cheyenne 9 28 23

<title>Florida Woman, Daughter Ordered To Pay Back $870K They Stole From Wyoming Medicaid | Cowboy State Daily</title>

A Florida woman who ran a Cheyenne behavioral health clinic, and her daughter, have been ordered to pay back more than $870,000 they stole from Wyoming Medicaid. They funneled fraudulent claims through the clinic for years, say federal prosecutors.

Florida Woman, Daughter Ordered To Pay Back $870K They Stole From Wyoming Medicaid

Employee kate meadows cropped

Kate Meadows

Agriculture

Wyoming ranchers say a $99 million John Deere right-to-repair settlement doesn't go far enough. They'll get small payouts while John Deere keeps control over repair software. "We think it is an unfair settlement,” said a Lander-area rancher.

Daily Smile: Saturday, November 23, 2024

In case you missed it

More in Daily Smile

Daily Smile: Saturday, July 4, 2026

Daily Smile: Friday, July 3, 2026

Daily Smile: Thursday, July 2, 2026

Daily Smile: Wednesday, July 1, 2026

Most read