http://www.codyenterprise.com/...c5-671850cb67dc.html



Man guilty of wasting sheep parts

MAX MILLER Sep 11, 2017 Updated 21 hrs ago


For many, September’s crisp air and shortening days herald the arrival of hunting season, and the pack trips, meditative glassing sessions and jerky dividends that come with it.

Not for Tyler Sluyter. Not this year, or next.

On Friday, a Park County jury found Sluyter guilty of wasting edible portions of a bighorn sheep he harvested in September 2015 in the Thorofare Plateau region of the Washakie Wilderness.


For the low misdemeanor, presiding Circuit Judge Bruce Waters ordered Sluyter to pay $1,040 – the maximum fine – and assigned him six months unsupervised probation and a 90-day suspended jail term. Most upsetting for the defendant, however, was Waters’ last stipulation – that Sluyter not be allowed to hunt, trap or fish anywhere in or outside of the state until Sept. 8, 2019.

“Mr. Sluyter’s hunting privileges are tremendously valuable to him, they’re a part of his culture and heritage,” the defendant’s attorney Neal Stelting said at sentencing, asking for a one-year ban.

Sluyter has 30 days to decide whether to appeal the decision.

Celebration to citation

In 2015, Sluyter won a coveted sheep tag in the Wyoming Game and Fish

Department lottery for hunting licenses. He harvested his sheep in the proper area and in-season, but a jury of six found Sluyter to be derelict in leaving much of the animal’s meat to rot in the mountains.

Sluyter had caped the sheep, removing the head and shoulder hide so they could be turned into a trophy mount upon Sluyter’s return to his home in Daniel, Wyo., near Pinedale, but the jury found he was not diligent in attending to the rest of his kill.

Sluyter and several other members of his hunting party testified that he had shot the sheep between four and six times, rendering much of the animal’s carcass bloodshot to the point of being inedible.

Prosecutor Branden Vilos and Eugene Brumbaugh, the hunter from Wapiti who initially called WGFD about the sheep’s carcass, disputed the number of bullet wounds in the sheep.

Sluyter’s two-day trial brought to Park County around a dozen witnesses from as near as Wapiti and as far as Cheyenne.

Appearing on behalf of the defense were several members of the Roberts family, also of Daniel, who were with Sluyter on his fateful hunt.

On the other side of the court room were a bevy of special witnesses called by the State of Wyoming: among them Brumbaugh, three game wardens for the agency and three workers for the WGFD Wildlife Forensics and Fish Health Laboratories in Laramie.

The case fell into WGFD hands in mid-September 2015, when Brumbaugh called the agency about what he described as a mal-attended carcass in the Thorofare.

“This isn’t right”

A seasoned hunter with over 100 big game hunts under his belt, Brumbaugh testified he knew something was wrong as soon as he laid eyes on the carcass.

Though the head and backstrap of the animal were missing, the sheep’s hind-quarters and tenderloins were untouched, Brumbaugh said. “They took the easy [meat] and left the rest,” the one-time guide testified.

He estimated between 80 and 90 percent of the edible meat, or around 30 pounds of the animal, had gone to waste.

Furthermore, Brumbaugh said, “This [ram] would have been one of the easiest ones I’ve ever seen to pack out.”

When he made the discovery, Brumbaugh said he was on his own sheep hunt with a long-time friend. The two of them talked about what to do that night in camp.

“This isn’t right,” Brumbaugh remembered telling his buddy. He decided to gather evidence and turn it into WGFD upon his return from the field. “[The hunter] will end up paying a fine and learning a lesson,” Brumbaugh said he thought at the time. “It ended up here.”

Brumbaugh took 23 pictures of the carcass, which the State turned into a grisly slide show during Brumbaugh’s two and half hour testimony.

He also recovered one .300 caliber shell casing, a cigarette butt and DNA samples from the sheep, which he stored in sandwich baggies.

Stelting cross-examined Brumbaugh at length about his ad hoc investigation.

The Thorofare region where the sheep was killed is rife with grizzly bears ready to descend on dead animals, and it’s the farthest place from a road in the lower 48 states, so Brumbaugh’s testimony, amateur photography and evidence collection formed the bedrock of the case against Sluyter.

Brumbaugh said he only saw one bullet wound in the animal, while Stelting suggested there could have been other wounds he missed. “All the photos of the sheep you took featured the sheep in the exact same position,” Stelting said, questioning whether Brumbaugh was thorough.

“Do you personally eat blood-shot meat? Do you know any hunter who does?” Stelting pressed.

“If there’s no damage on the outside, then there can’t be damage on the inside,” Brumbaugh countered, saying he found only the single shot after a long look. “You need to cut it up to see what you got,” Brumbaugh continued, and he said the hunter had made no attempt to do so.

Wardens at work

Next came the wardens.

“At the time [Brumbaugh] came to me, he indicated he was pretty upset about the violation,” WGFD Chief of Fisheries Allan Osterland testified. He was a warden at the time of the crime.

Osterland took Brumbaugh’s photos and DNA evidence and forwarded them to the WGFD forensic laboratory in Laramie.

He also questioned Sluyter about the sheep kill, and elicited what Vilos said was a partial confession from the hunter. Sluyter recanted that interview at trial, saying he had been nervous and didn’t know he was being recorded. Audio of that interview was played for the jury, however.

Osterland also tracked down Sluyter’s trophy mount, locating it in Fales’ Taxidermy in Pinedale.

Osterland asked to take the mount from the shop for comparison to Brumbaugh’s DNA samples, and the shop owner handed it over voluntarily.

Earlier in the case, Stelting argued that Osterland’s seizure of the head was a violation of Sluyter’s Fourth Amendment protection against illegal seizures. That appeal was denied by former District Judge Steven Cranfill, however, who said the seizure was legal because the head was in public view.

An evidentiary road block

Stelting was successful in suppressing other potentially damaging information, however.

When a trio of WGFD forensic lab employees took the stand to testify about the DNA samples Brumbaugh had taken, Stelting objected the State had failed to properly maintain a “chain of custody” for the samples.

The argument went to chambers and lasted over 20 minutes.

When Vilos and Stelting re-emerged, the prosecutor was visibly flustered and asked for a brief recess to retool his approach.

Waters had ruled the DNA evidence inadmissable because somewhere between entering Osterland’s care and getting to the WGFD lab the State had not maintained proper control. It’s unclear what link in the chain was compromised.

With the samples thrown out, the analysts from Laramie could only testify that they had written reports.

Their findings could not be discussed, and WGFD forensic specialist Kim Frazier left the stand with a grimace on her face, seemingly having made a long trip north for little reason.

Blood-shot or not

Testimony from Sluyter and the members of his hunting party concluded the trial.

Three people in the party testified they had heard “five or six” shots from Sluyter’s gun, but none said they had seen him make the kill.

“I’ve never seen anybody damage meat that badly in my life,” Ryan Roberts testified.

“We were joshing [Sluyter] a little bit about shooting so much,” Louie Roberts added. “We got to the back end of the animal and it was all blood-shot,” Louie continued: “It was all mush.”

The defendant also took the stand. “I think I was seeing hair and pulling the trigger,” Sluyter said, calling it a case of “ram-fever.”

The left ham “was bone fragments and lead fragments all the way through,” he said. A meat processor getting such meat “would have said, ‘Why did you drag that thing here?’ And he would throw it in the garbage,” Sluyter said.

“We don’t teach [young hunters] to use six bullets to kill an animal,” Stelting said in his closing argument. “Things happen in the woods. You may not like it, but it’s not illegal.”

Sluyter harvested “only the portions that were easy to remove while taking the cape,” Vilos countered. “He wanted a three-quarter curl to put on the wall, and we know that because of what was left behind,” the prosecutor said.

“This is intentional and needless waste.”

After 45 minutes of discussion, the jury sided with Vilos.

Judgment

Noting a prior moose-poaching incident and a bear-baiting violation, Vilos said Sluyter was a repeat offender who needed a stern lesson. At sentencing he asked for $2,000 in restitution, in addition to the $1,040 fine, and a three-year hunting ban.

Stelting asked for the return of his client’s trophy and a one-year ban.

Waters split the difference, assigning a two-year ban. “If you have other licenses that’s too bad,” he said.

“He had legal permission to take that sheep, so I don’t think [restitution is appropriate],” Waters said. In any case, bighorn sheep are valued at $15,000 by WGFD in poaching cases, he said.

The return of the head was an issue for another day, the judge continued, though he said he was inclined to think of the trophy the same way he thought of stolen goods.

Waters said his sympathy for the defendant was limited by a number of factors.

“In the back of my mind, I wonder if all those extra shots were for the purpose of damaging the meat,” Waters said.

“Wyoming is a Compact State, so keep in mind if you apply for a license in another state there’s a good chance Wyoming will find out about that violation,” Waters warned before court was dismissed Friday evening.

Wyoming has one of the most conservative definitions of "edible meat" that must be recovered from a game animal.

Basically you have to take the shoulders, tenderloins, backstraps and hindquarters. You are not required to salvage the meat from the ribs, brisket or neck.

I can understand not wanting to mess with the tenderloins on a gut-shot sheep(shitty work for a few ounces of crap covered meat...) but failing to pack out the shoulders and hindquarters is inexcusable, IMO. I am a bit surprised that they could convict him on photos alone. It seems that they should have had a warden hike in and make a full report.

This does not settle well with me. I can't argue that he is innocent because I wasn't present. He is convicted on photos of said ram from only one angle. Waters at the end speculating that he shot the animal purposely to ruin meat. They admitted it would have only been 30 lbs. I don't know of many mountain hunters trading in their ethics for a 30 lb chore, that the lead witness described as an easy pack out. No priors either. Maybe some anti trophy hunters in the prosecution???

Perry

It says he had 2 priors- moose poaching and bear baiting. Maybe if he had used some of the new super-duper flamawhackum bullets there might of been more exit holes to support his story. Shitty cup and core bullets anyways.

quote:

Originally posted by kda55:
It says he had 2 priors- moose poaching and bear baiting. Maybe if he had used some of the new super-duper flamawhackum bullets there might of been more exit holes to support his story. Shitty cup and core bullets anyways.

2 priors... , I glanced right over that. I think that does change things a bit. Definitely makes one suspect.

Perry

2 priors is probably why they spent $100,000 of Pittman Robertson act, and hunting license revenue to bust him.

What a shame they couldn't get more out of him in fines and jail time. He obviously deserves it.

I do find it interesting they didn't send an officer in to do a professional investigation. That way he wouldn't have had much recourse during the trial.

Taking away hunting rights would be all the punishment he needs.

Reasonable jail time should be based on the crime.

These guys that fight pit bulls regularly get more jail time than those that predmeditate murder.

This was a misdemeanor anyway.

Situationally speaking he COULD be innocent. I'm very bothered by the fact that more of an investigation was'nt done on the ram. 5 shots from a high powered rifle could easily ruin most of your meat. I personally have seen it on hogs, whitetails and nilgai.
You have to believe he will appeal. It sounds like he has money given the hunts he pays for. It'll be interesting to see how this one shakes out.

Perry

Easiest possible pack-out but too hard to send a warden?

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
Easiest possible pack-out but too hard to send a warden?

The "easiest possible pack-out" statement stuck me as odd considering they later said that the sheep was killed in an area that is the furthest you can get from a road in the lower 48. Kinda makes me think that the witness had an ax to grind.

quote:

Kinda makes me think that the witness had an ax to grind.

Well the hunter did take a sheep that the guides client could have.

quote:

Originally posted by perry:
Situationally speaking he COULD be innocent. I'm very bothered by the fact that more of an investigation was'nt done on the ram. 5 shots from a high powered rifle could easily ruin most of your meat. I personally have seen it on hogs, whitetails and nilgai.

Perry

Yeah well try to explain to a game warden in states with strict game wastage laws that the meat was ruined. Especially on carefully controlled animals like sheep. Generally if it's there you take it. When you get home is the time to sort it out.

"Wanton waste" is a serious violation, but why is that so? Assuming the animal was legally taken (in season, proper tags etc.) why does the State care what happens to it after it's down? The animal is gone from the herd and from a resource management perspective it makes no difference how the carcass is finally disposed of. What the human predator doesn't take will quickly be eaten by 4 legged predators and scavengers. Nothing truly goes to waste in nature.

I am only asking a philosophical question and not defending those who would willingly waste usable meat. All hunters have an ethical, moral and legal obligation to fully utilize the bounty of nature.

quote:

Originally posted by Bigasanelk:
"Wanton waste" is a serious violation, but why is that so? Assuming the animal was legally taken (in season, proper tags etc.) why does the State care what happens to it after it's down? The animal is gone from the herd and from a resource management perspective it makes no difference how the carcass is finally disposed of. What the human predator doesn't take will quickly be eaten by 4 legged predators and scavengers. Nothing truly goes to waste in nature.

I am only asking a philosophical question and not defending those who would willingly waste usable meat. All hunters have an ethical, moral and legal obligation to fully utilize the bounty of nature.

I really think that it is more about the aesthetics of hunting. People have complained that "trophy hunters" often only take the horns and leave the meat behind. If you read books written prior to 1975 it is common to read about the horns and cape being taken and the rest of the carcass being left behind.

Your comment about the "obligation to fully utilize" is interesting when you think about the fact that "fully utilize" is completely subjective. Really, is any harvested animal, domestic or wild, every completely utilized by man? Heck, those bones that you left on the mountain could have been ground to make bone-meal....

As far as I know Alaska has the most stringent wanton waste laws. If you leave even the meat that lies between the ribs you will be cited. But even Alaska's law does not require the hunter to keep the heart, liver or tongue, not to mention the kidneys and the meat from the head.

I believe that your question is an interesting one.