A Wyoming Man Allegedly Tortured a Wolf. He Barely Broke State Law.

On February 29, Daniel, Wyoming resident Cody Roberts allegedly ran a juvenile wolf down with his snowmobile, taped its mouth shut, transported it to the town’s Green River Bar, posed for photos with the animal, then either beat or shot it to death, depending on which version of the report you read. State wildlife officials received a tip about the incident, and later fined Roberts $250 for a misdemeanor violation of Wyoming’s prohibition against possession of live wildlife. No other charges or penalties have been brought against him. As of April 10, however, the Sublette County Sheriff’s Office announced that they—along with the Sublette County Attorney’s office—are now investigating Roberts.

“The individual was cited for a misdemeanor violation of Wyoming Game and Fish Commission regulations, Chapter 10, Importation and Possession of Live Warm-Blooded Wildlife,” says the Wyoming Game and Fish Department in a statement addressing the incident. “The department’s investigation indicated there were no other statutory or regulatory violations.”

The 206-word statement itself acknowledges the controversy that’s raging around the incident, saying: “The department acknowledges the significant concern and dismay expressed by many people from around the state and nation.”

Why was Roberts able to torture a wolf to death with no serious consequences? The answer lies not only in Wyoming’s incredibly lax wildlife regulations, but also in the violence that permeates the relationship between the state and its most famous wild animal.

After being extirpated in 1926, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) reintroduced wolves to Wyoming in Yellowstone National Park in 1995. Wolves, the villains in many childhood stories, are a locus of fear for humans. But the animal also serves a vital role in its native ecosystem, where it helps keep ungulate populations healthy by slowing the spread of disease. And it does that at a net financial benefit to taxpayers, since tourists now flock to the state to view wolves. A study conducted in 2021 found that wolf-related tourism brings over $35 million annually to areas surrounding the park.

Speaking of taxes, before all the culture warring and fear mongering, it was the goal of the Republican Party to reduce tax burdens faced by the wealthy and corporations. The Republican Party’s policy positions are widely unpopular, so the GOP instead hoodwinks voters using fear and lies. The Republican-led Wyoming Statehouse passed a bill in 2021 calling to exterminate 90 percent of the state’s wolf population—a bill based on lies and misinformation. Pushing for policies based on fear instead of science has led to regulations around wolves that are unique among wildlife laws, mostly in their encouragement of cruelty.

When management of the species transferred from federal to state control in 2012, Wyoming’s political leaders established two distinct areas with differing population management goals. Areas adjacent to Yellowstone were set aside for trophy hunting, where wolf hunting is regulated. The rest of the state was designated a “predator zone” where wolves can be killed without regulation, reason, or justification. Wyoming also classifies coyotes, red fox, stray cats, jackrabbits, porcupines, raccoons and striped skunks as predators, and permits killing them throughout the state.

“You could pull a wolf apart with horses in 85 percent of the state,” explains Amaroq Weiss, Senior Wolf Advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. In the predator zone, there is no regulation governing how or when wolves can be killed. This stands in contrast to typical hunting regulations in any other state, where what are called “methods of take” are carefully defined to ensure animals are killed in ethical, humane ways, along with precise dates, to-the-minute guidelines on legal shooting hours, and generally universal bans on artificial light sources. The age and sex of animals it’s permissible to shoot are also written in law. But none of that is true in Wyoming’s predator zone when it comes to wolves. You don’t even need a hunting license or tag to kill one, just the opportunity.

Weiss cites “wolf whacking” as an example, and it’s how Roberts captured the wolf he would go on to torture and kill. The term describes using a snowmobile to run a wolf to the point of exhaustion. Once it slows or collapses, you kill the animal by running it over. As Roberts’ escapade demonstrates, sometimes that might take multiple impacts, and sometimes the animal is simply left to die a slow, painful death.

“Legislators in Wyoming are aware of the practice, and have declined to do anything about it,” says Weiss.

The wolf advocate points out that the wolf Roberts tortured to death is also, “probably not even a year old yet.” And was likely so injured by the impact with the snowmobile that it was unable to resist capture, or fight back as Roberts allegedly tortured it.

Why isn’t behavior like this covered by animal cruelty laws? Because, in Wyoming, those don’t apply to wolves.

“The incident occurred in a part of the state where gray wolves are legally classified as predatory animals,” explains Wyoming Game and Fish Department’s statement on the incident. “Predatory animals are not managed by the department and animal cruelty laws, per Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-3-1008 (a)(vii) do not apply to predatory animals.”

Weiss also explains that, even if wolf abusers could be prosecuted under some statute, doing so would require willful participation from individual law enforcement officers, all the way up through their agency’s chain of command, and into the state’s political leadership. “Even if a [District Attorney] wanted to take up a case, a police officer would need to first bring it to them,” she says.

The only illegal thing Roberts appears to have done under Wyoming law is to move the wolf from one place, to another. Hitting it with his snowmobile, taping its mouth shut, dragging it into a bar, beating it, and eventually killing it all seem to have been not just permissible activities in state law, but the inevitable and intentional result of Wyoming’s policies.

And even while the wolf was left to suffer, Wyoming law worked to protect Roberts. Lawmakers there understand how controversial these policies are, so they created a regulation that conceals the identity of people who hunt and kill wolves. No such policy exists for any other species, anywhere that I am aware of. And even though the regulation doesn’t protect individuals who break the law, state wildlife officials attempted to use it to “shut down communications with the media,” according to WyoFile, a blog covering political affairs in the state.

This is far from the first event that sparked public outrage over Wyoming’s predator zones. The culture war surrounding wolves flared up last September, when one of the wolves Colorado reintroduced was lured into Wyoming and killed inside the state’s predator zone.

Since the scandal broke last week, state officials have been under fire from members of the public.

“I would be disappointed if anyone were to paint Wyoming with a broad brush and suggest that Wyoming citizens condone the reckless, thoughtless and heinous actions of one individual,” tweeted Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon in response to the outcry. Gordon, a Republican, refused enter into an agreement with Colorado to return their wolves when they cross the Wyoming border. Colorado has working agreements for the return of their wolves with Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona. Weiss says no legislation that might protect wolves from future acts of cruelty has been introduced in the state.