Residents call for felony charges after Cody Roberts reportedly taped animal’s mouth shut, took photos and killed it behind bar
A Wyoming hunter who reportedly ran over a gray wolf with a snowmobile, taped the creature’s mouth shut, took a picture with it inside a local bar and then shot it to death behind the tavern has ignited calls for stiffer penalties in such an egregious case of animal abuse.
Cody Roberts, 42, is at the center of the uproar after being ticketed and fined a couple of hundred dollars for illegally possessing the wolf while it was still alive – but so far going unpunished for the manner in which he is said to have killed the animal.
Meanwhile, Wyoming wildlife authorities have kept much of the case hidden under a veil of secrecy, arguing that records on wolves taken in the state are not matter of public record under laws there.
But the news outlet WyoFile.com reported that the laws only protect the privacy of people “legally taking a wolf” within the state and therefore may not apply in the case of Roberts, who stands accused of flagrantly and cruelly violating hunting ethics.
I mean, hiding in a tree, disguising your scent, scoping a dumb animal and shooting it with a rifle from a hundred yards away isn't exactly a fair fight either. I agree there is a difference, I think there is just a lot of mythmaking about what is effectively using all of the gifts of civilization in order to trick a sub toddler intelligence deer that it's not about to be murdered.
The criticism isn't about a fair fight, it's about the unnecessary cruelty in the treatment of the animal. An important part of hunting ethics is minimizing the suffering of the prey. Kills should be as quick and efficient as possible.
You’re not wrong, but I’ll say some devil’s s advocate stuff: hunting is a lot harder to get a successful kill than you make it out, deer are experts in their environment, they aren’t just bumbling around, and hunters usually honor the animals they kill reasonably well.
It is a cultural ritual and a challenge, but certainly not a "fight" in the sense of taking your chances one v. one. I don't hunt. I find the idea of making myself incredibly uncomfortable solely for the opportunity to be the one who kills my meat animal to be distinctly unappealing. That said, I eat meat. I can't do so and also condemn someone for being willing to kill an animal, even if I am eeshed out by the ones who seem to enjoy it too much.
I grew up around a lot of hunters, though, and to a one they all had chest-freezers full of venison, so in terms of expending vertebrate life they're certainly no worse than I am. Even field crops involve some chance of killing vertebrates, though I don't think it's as many as some of my fellow omnivores like to imply (and hay for livestock feed seems to be the worst of it). I'm cognizant of the difference between killing to eat and tolerating rather less killing in order to eat.
Ironically, allowing hunting itself is probably one of the best ways (and certainly one of the oldest) to encourage conservation of wild spaces and the lives therein, and if properly regulated it can be maintained at a scale that I don't think would be out of line with a fairly natural role for humans in the natural world. The world is messy, people have deeply held beliefs coming from vastly different frameworks and experiences, and finding the right balance is necessary to avoid even more tragic disasters.
Fuck this guy in Wyoming, though. Showing off and torturing a dying animal is cruelty for its own sake and I don't think that's a hard line to draw either. He sure as shit wouldn't do that with a calf or deer (or maybe he would, but he'd find even fewer defenders).
Maybe you should ask Native Americans what they think about the honor and respect they hold for the animals they hunt. Which, you might want to consider, they consider a large part of their religious rites. Do you think they'd be offended to be compared to poachers, abusers, and torturers?
I guarantee you that the Wyoming Game and Fish department is doing everything it can in its power to throw the book at this guy and that they are disgusted by him. They're likely being very careful not to make mistakes and hand out information they're not legally allowed to.
If he would have just shot it to put it out of it's misery after it was run over I don't think anyone would have been upset. But duck taping it's mouth shut and then transporting it to a bar and then taking pictures for clout, and then shooting it, I hope this guy spends some serious time behind bars.
Gotta demonstrate a public need to know about what you hunt.
But it all falls apart anyways because as wyofile.com said the protections are only for legally taking a wolf. So a newspaper would appeal if the case gets enough social media traction?
Nono you don't understand every hunter has assured me that it's not about the sick satisfaction of taking a life, it's about helping nature by controlling populations and eating sustainable food, or whatever bullshit they come up with.
Yeah, don't go kill a wild (organic) animal and eat it, go to the grocery store and buy the antibiotic-riddled meat produced in awful conditions by a factory farm like the rest of us you disgusting FUCKS! /s
Dawg, I live in a real rural place. Maybe like 20% of the people I know use wild game as their primary source of meat; they take 1 elk or maybe 2 deer and fill up the freezer for the year to feed their family.
Trophy hunters, however, can absolutely FUCK right off.