Backers of a proposed “clean kill” law say it would send a powerful message that wildlife torture, like what happened to a wolf in Daniel last year, is unacceptable in Wyoming.
However, some retired federal wildlife officers said that sooner or later, Wyoming must also come to grips with the practice of “whacking” predators, or running down wolves and coyotes with snowmobiles.
There was worldwide outrage over reports that Daniel resident Cody Roberts ran a wolf over with a snowmobile in February 2024, retired U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) biologist and wildlife manager Dave Paullin told Cowboy State Daily.
Nearly a year later, there’s still raw emotions over the graphic details and photos have came out about the incident.
“I think that’s what everybody got excited about, that this guy ran a wolf over with a snowmobile,” said Paullin, who lives in Sheridan County.
Retired FWS game warden Tim Eicher of Cody put his thoughts about “whacking” remaining legal in Wyoming bluntly.
“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig,” he said.
Case Became Epicenter Of Outrage
According to accounts of events from February 2024, Roberts captured the wolf after running it down it with a snowmobile. He then took it to his home, duct-taped the animal’s mouth shut and posed for photos with it.
Later, he took it to the Green River Bar in Daniel and showed it off, while more photos and videos were taken of the animal. Then, he took the wolf behind the bar and killed it.
Big Piney District Senior Game and Fish Warden Adam Hymas ticketed Roberts for illegal possession of a live, warm-blooded animal, for which Roberts forfeited a $250 bond, according to reports.
The incident sparked outrage across the country and all over the world. Many were aghast because they thought that Roberts got off far too lightly.
Felony Penalty For Torture
The clean kill bill, House Bill 275, and a similar measure, House Bill 3, wouldn’t outlaw hitting predators with vehicles.
Instead, people who use vehicles to run down predators would be required to make every reasonable effort to kill the animals as soon as possible, according to the bills.
House Bill 275 would make deliberately prolonging the animal’s suffering a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison and/or a $5,000 fine.
Separate Matter
The focus of the clean kill bill is to clarify that Wyoming upholds the standards of ethical hunting, and that deliberately letting an animal suffer is unacceptable, said two Wyoming sportsman who support HB 275.
“Or focus is to send a clear and strong message that Wyoming will not tolerate the torture and abuse of any of our animals,” noted Wyoming outdoorsman Paul Ulrich told Cowboy State Daily.
The bill takes a hard stance against deliberately making an animal suffer, as is what reportedly happened with the wolf in Daniel, said Josh Coursey, president of the Muley Fanatics deer conservation organization.
“This bill is very explicit, to address the torture and mutilation of an animal, with the intention to do such,” he said.
Coursey and Ulrich said that whether pursuing predators with vehicles should remain legal is a separate matter, outside the purview of HB 275.
The idea of requiring clean kills for predators, as outlined in the bill, was overwhelmingly supported by people responding a survey on the matter.
That included 78% of people polled approving of a felony charge for wildlife abuse or torture, according to a survey conducted by the CYGNAL company. And 74% of Wyoming hunters polled support it.
Whacking Previously Debated
Whether to ban whacking predators with snowmobiles or other vehicles was hotly debated during meetings of the Wyoming Treatment of Predators Working Group last year.
The group was formed in response to the Daniel wolf incident and charged with coming up with a possible response.
Numerous people came to the group’s meeting, calling for the practice to be banned. But the group ultimately recommended only for requiring a quick kill after an animal had been hit.
Means Of Take
Eicher said that defining a “clean kill” can be tricky, particularly if no specific means of take, or ways of killing the animal, aren’t defined in statute.
For example, if a hunter accidently gut shoots an elk and pursues it for miles before catching up and finishing it off, “is that a clean kill?” he asked.
For big game animals, such as deer, elk and antelope, the legal means of take are clearly laid out in law, Paullin said.
Game and Fish regulations specify the types of firearms, bows, and arrows that can be used to kill game animals, he said.
Those animals can’t legally be killed by deliberately running them over or beating them to death, for example.
But there are no such designated means of take for predatory animals in Wyoming, Eicher said. That means all bets are off when it comes to how those animals can legally be killed.
So again, what constitutes the “clean kill” of a predator could remain murky, he said.
Different From Road Kill
Paullin said he understands misgivings over banning chasing predators with vehicles in Wyoming, because it could hamper ranchers’ efforts to protect their livestock.
And there were also concerns that making striking wildlife with a vehicle a crime could get people fined for roadkill accidents, he added.
But if another bill, specifically to ban predator whacking, was brought forth, it could specify “deliberate intent,” he said.
“If I’m driving a vehicle way out there in the Shirley Basin in the middle of the night and I hit a deer, there’s no intent,” Paullin said. “That’s an accident, and I’m going to end up having to pay money for it in terms of insurance rates and vehicle repair.
“That’s different than purposefully running over a wolf.”
Eicher said that if statutes were changed to ban wolf and coyote whacking as a “recreational” activity, the law could still allow for ranchers to get special permits to use vehicles to pursue predators threatening their livestock.
Mark Heinz can be reached at mark@cowboystatedaily.com.
