Get reliable rangeland science

Rangelands and forest lands of the western United States have become increasingly valued and criticized for the provision of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and livestock agriculture.� These conflicts are particularly acute in Wyoming, USA where half of the state is federally owned, the surface ownership pattern is heterogeneous, and conservation and agriculture are substantial.� We surveyed Wyoming-based members of seven agricultural (Ag) and seven environmental/conservation (Env/Con) stakeholder groups to: (1) determine if special interests were mutually exclusive, (2) identify perceptions of compatibility of agriculture and conservation, (3) quantify ranking of 10 values for open spaces, and (4) determine commonalities between groups.��� A total of 197 participants completed the survey; 150 from Ag groups and 47 from Env/Con groups.� Two Env/Con groups declined to participate altogether.� Interests were not mutually exclusive because 63% of Ag participants also indicated an interest in natural resources and 55% of Env/Con participants indicated an interest in agriculture.� Groups agreed that Wyoming�s open spaces are important for both the conservation of biodiversity and livestock grazing.� However, 94% of Ag participants reported that biodiversity conservation and livestock grazing are compatible, compared to only 70% of Env/Con participants.� Values such as �meat production� were ranked first by Ag participants but next to last by Env/Con participants.� However, �watershed�, �plant diversity�, and �wildlife diversity� were both ranked in the top five for both groups, an indication of common ecological values.� Both groups indicated that maintaining open space and functioning ecosystems, or preventing fragmentation, was the greatest commonality.� Groups also suggested additional communication, respect, and research are needed to achieve harmony.� Our results indicate the rhetoric of division between agriculture and environmental/conservation groups does not represent reality.� Both types of groups have a unifying �ecological heritage� that can lead to accomplishing compatible objectives such as maintaining open space through traditional pastoralism.