Predators & Cattle, Sheep and Other Lifestock

[Coffeehouse]

In Norway we have a problem which is a bit of an irony.

The sheep-farmers in this nation lose on an annual base around 50,000 sheep, out of a total of approx. 2,2 million sheep, to predators such as the Lynx Lynx (Latin name in lack of an English name, 'Gaupe' in Norwegian), Wolf and Bear.
In our neighbouring country Sweden, there are about 500,000 sheep, and most are in, what we call 'innmarksbeite' in Norway, grazing in low-lying areas, close to the farms, with little forests and habitat suited for the Gaupe (read Lynx Lynx), Wolf and Bear.
The contrast is stark to the 2,2 million sheep in Norway who mostly graze in 'utmarksbeite', in mountaineous areas with much forests and apt conditions for predators.
Still, the Swedes lose only 500 sheep on an annual basis.

So what's the irony? Well, the Swedish gov't seems to be providing their sheep-farmers with funds to build anti-predator fencing around the areas where the sheep graze. And if the farmers don't use the funds appropriately, they lose the funds, they must pay for the fencing themselves. Likewise, there is little flow of money to the farmers from the Swedish gov't whenever a sheep is hunted down and killed since the annual deathtoll only stands at 500.
However, in Norway, sheep farmers receive about 1,700 Norwegian Kroner for every sheep taken by a predator. That's 1,000 NOK more than the farmer gets when he sends the sheep to the slaughter-house. Thus, the Norwegian gov't is in effect, with the new legislation passed a few years ago, paying the farmer to let his sheep run loose and get killed, (often the sheep aren't kiled but badly injured and can go on about for days before dying). And usually its the farmer him/herself who has to go out and shoot the injured sheep, which naturally isn't a nice job to have. At the same time, the farmer is stuck inbetween a rock and a very hard place; he can't not let his sheep go out and graze, but when he does he loses many sheep, but he gains economically, in a massive leap of irony, from it.

Which leave me thinking if my Gov't is stupid, because the obvious solution to this would be not providing financial support for every sheep killed, but financial incentives for every sheep saved! The Gov't paying the farmer a certain amount for making sure the percentage of lost sheep out of the total flock is at a minimal level.
But, it gets even more twisted. Because it seems that the farmer is chipping in on the grave-digging himself when the majority of Norwegian sheep farmers are insisting that there be no fencing in the 'utmarksbeite' (read definition above). And why in the name of Sheep, would the farmer do this? Because the farmer gains even though he loses sheep. It's simply not in the farmers interest to build lots of fences because the sheep farmers who earn the most money during a year are the sheep farmers who lose a reasonable amount of sheep (without endangering the next year's reproduction potential).
Norway stands for around 40% of payments to farmers for killed sheep in Europe. We have about 5% of the total amount of predators roaming the continent. Anyone see something wrong with that?

Traditionally in Norway there is a view that fences are a bad thing, and that things should be kept as nature intended it. Thus you will search long and hard for any farmers who want their forests and hills to be fenced in. They'd rather shoot all the Wolfs and the Bears before they let that happen, which makes it extremely difficult to solve the matter, in the greatest irony that they lose the sheep they care for, but are paid substantial sums for it.
And the Gov't has with the Parliament made it Law that predators like all other wildlife, have the right to reach a substantial population, both in the name of conservation and because the Norwegian forests and mountains would be at loss without them.

So I'm curious to how other nations deal with predators, like the United States, Canada, Finland, (New Zealand?) and other places where predators have a reasonable foothold.