Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 11-24-108 (2026)

Stock at large or picketed on public highways;

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
penalties for violations; impoundment and disposition; fees;
proceeds from disposition thereof; removal of dead or injured
animals.

     (a) No owner or person having custody or charge of
livestock shall permit the livestock to run at large in any
fenced public highways in Wyoming as defined in W.S. 31-1-101.
Livestock shall not be picketed on a public highway right-of-way
from one (1) hour before sundown to one (1) hour after sunrise.
If livestock are picketed on a public highway and escape, the
owner or person having custody or charge of the livestock is
deemed to have permitted the livestock to run at large in
violation of this section. No livestock shall be picketed on an
interstate or national defense highway as defined in W.S.
31-18-801(a)(xvi).

     (b) Any person or corporation violating this section shall
be fined not less than two hundred dollars ($200.00) nor more
than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00) and in addition shall
pay all damage done by the livestock. The provisions of this
section do not apply to livestock drifting into lanes or fenced
roads in going to or returning from their accustomed ranges.

     (c) Any sheriff, deputy sheriff, livestock brand
inspector, or officer or trooper of the Wyoming highway patrol,
after notification to the owner of livestock described in
subsection (a) of this section, if known, shall within four (4)
hours remove the livestock from the public highway, impound the
same in the nearest convenient place where feed and water are
available and immediately notify the owner, if known, of the
action. If ownership is not known, the impounding officer shall
report his action to an inspector. The inspector shall make a
diligent effort to ascertain ownership of the impounded
livestock, and for this purpose may hold the livestock not more
than ten (10) days. If unable to determine ownership, the
inspector shall dispose of the impounded livestock. Reasonable
transportation and disposal expenses shall be paid from the
proceeds of the disposal, if any.

     (d) A removal fee of not to exceed twenty dollars ($20.00)
per head shall be allowed for the expense incurred in removing
livestock from any public highway and an impounding fee for
expenses incurred for the feed and care of the animal shall be
allowed the person responsible for feed and care of the
livestock removed. The inspector is responsible for collection
and payment to the rightful claimants of removal and impounding
fees when impounded livestock is surrendered to the owner. Upon
disposal, the total amount of removal and impounding fees shall
be made known to the selling agency at the market or slaughter
plant by the inspector and shall constitute a first claim on the
net proceeds of the livestock after shipping and disposal
expenses have been paid, and shall be forwarded by the selling
agency to the claimant.

     (e) Should the proceeds of the disposition of any
impounded animal be insufficient to pay all legitimate shipping
and disposal expenses and the removal and impounding fees
approved by the inspector, the deficiency shall be paid by the
board or its agency.

     (f) The net proceeds, if any, from the disposition of the
impounded livestock after deduction of removal, impounding,
trucking and disposal expenses, shall be forwarded to the estray
account of the board. The board shall hold the proceeds until
paid to the rightful owner of the livestock or otherwise
disposed of according to law.

     (g) A peace officer may remove, destroy or otherwise
dispose of an animal injured on a state highway after a
reasonable attempt to locate the owner of a salvageable animal
or a game warden in the case of a wild animal. If reasonably
possible, the peace officer shall contact the brand inspector
before removing, destroying or disposing of livestock. The
carcass of an animal killed on a state highway shall be disposed
of by highway maintenance crews. If the owner desires, he may
claim the carcass from the maintenance crew. The crews shall
report to the inspector brands, marks, tags or other
identification. The inspector shall endeavor to establish
ownership of the animal and notify the owner in writing or
notify the local game warden as may be appropriate.
Notwithstanding W.S. 24-1-112 and as part of their duties, any
peace officer, inspector or other person acting under this
section may, but is not obligated to, attempt to repair any
fencing through which an animal has gained improper access to
the area in which the animal is found.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1989–2007 · leading case: Nylen v. Dayton, 770 P.2d 1112 (Wyo. 1989).
Nylen v. Dayton, 770 P.2d 1112 (Wyo. 1989). · cites it 14× “§ 11-24-108 (1977 AS AMENDED) CREATES A STANDARD OF: (a) NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE LIVESTOCK OWNER/KEEPER; OR (b) A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE LIVESTOCK OWNER/KEEPER; OR (c) NEGLIGENCE PER SE ON THE PART OF THE LIVESTOCK OWNER/KEEPER.”
Andersen,. v. Two Dot Ranch, Inc., 2002 WY 105 (Wyo. 2002). · cites it 6× “[119] In 1919, one year after the Garretson decision, the legislature enacted a statute entitled "Domestic Stock Shall Not Be Allowed to Run at Large in Lanes" (Strays in Public Lanes Statute), 8 the precursor to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 11-24-108 (Lexis-Nexis 2001) (Strays on Fenced…”
Hincks v. Walton Ranch Co., 2007 WY 12 (Wyo. 2007). · cites it 5× “Hincks claimed Walton was negligent in permitting livestock to roam at large onto a public highway in violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 11-24-108 (LexisNexis 2005) which provides in pertinent part: (a) No owner or person having custody or charge of livestock shall permit the…”
Roitz v. Kidman, 913 P.2d 431 (Wyo. 1996). · cites it 4× “The ranchers moved for a summary judgment, and the district court granted their motion, finding that they were not negligent and were not liable to the parents under the provisions of Wyo.Stat. § 11-24-108 (1981). The district court also found that the undisputed facts placed…”
Hill v. Park Cnty. Ex Rel. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 856 P.2d 456 (Wyo. 1993). · cites it 4× “Second, appellants claim that Wyo. Stat. § 11-24-108(c) (1989) imposes a duty on Thompson.”
Long v. Daly, 156 P.3d 994 (Wyo. 2007). · cites it 3× “" Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 11-24-108 (a) (LexisNexis 2005).”
— Wyo. Stat. § 11-24-108(a) — 2 cases
Nylen v. Dayton, 770 P.2d 1112 (Wyo. 1989). “§ 11-24-108 (1977 AS AMENDED) CREATES A STANDARD OF: (a) NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE LIVESTOCK OWNER/KEEPER; OR (b) A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF THE LIVESTOCK OWNER/KEEPER; OR (c) NEGLIGENCE PER SE ON THE PART OF THE LIVESTOCK OWNER/KEEPER.”
Long v. Daly, 156 P.3d 994 (Wyo. 2007). “" Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 11-24-108 (a) (LexisNexis 2005).”
— Wyo. Stat. § 11-24-108(c) — 1 case
Hill v. Park Cnty. Ex Rel. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 856 P.2d 456 (Wyo. 1993). “Second, appellants claim that Wyo. Stat. § 11-24-108(c) (1989) imposes a duty on Thompson.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.