When I lived in Colorado I saw ranching and environmental groups get together and make great progress when they each stopped seeing each other as the villain and agreed on a new common villain: ski resorts and their related development. They avoided some of the hyper-partisanship that was plaguing some other western states at the time.

So I have seen that it is possible. But it requires the environmentalists to see the rural lifestyle and ranching in a different way, and it requires the ranchers to see predators (and their political defenders) in a different way.

While there are short-term ‘wins’ by vested interest groups, wolf politics in greater Yellowstone is characterized by long-term unresolved conflict and fierce antagonistic political battles. Every year wolf depredation of livestock – primarily cattle and sheep – occurs on both public and private land. Most incidents result in passionate exchanges within the editorial pages of regional newspapers. Dogmatic responses are the norm; the debate is framed in terms reducing/eliminating the wolf population or protecting them under the Endangered Species Act.

We can continue with the status quo political battle. However, there are those of us who see the possibility for a third way. Rather than the cyclical win-lose cycle between conflicting stakeholders, win-win solutions exist. Win-win outcomes require us to face the problems that real people face on the ground. E.g. minimize/eliminate large carnivore depredation of livestock without eliminating wolves. You may not believe this to be possible. However, examples exist:

In the literature:

http://books.google.com/books?id=jBe9HwAACAAJ&dq=coexisting+with+large+carnivores
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t75n77773p802771/

In practice:

http://www.keystoneconservation.us/
http://www.sunranch.com/SRA/Index.html
http://www.nrccooperative.org/Kaminski_MLC.htm
http://www.blackfootchallenge.org/am/publish/wildlife.php

I am happy to continue this discussion, but let’s keep it civil.