Most communities believe making highways safer for humans and wildlife as a win-win proposition. But what happens when they don't? Adjacent to Yellowstone National Park, the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) planned more than 50 miles of highway expansion projects to accommodate increased park visitation and traffic. Yellowstone's iconic wildlife from elk and moose to grizzly bears and bison are killed by vehicles on this section of US 20. In addition, multiple ungulate migrations from Yellowstone National Park cross US 20 into Montana and Idaho, and traffic projections could further obstruct these migrations. Studies have pinpointed hotspots, and ITD's plans have suggested wildlife crossings. In 2015, local residents and conservation organizations began advocating for safer roads through Island Park, ID on US 20. But when ITD announced alternatives with wildlife crossings with fencing in an Environmental Assessment for the first segment of the highway expansion, opposition mounted. Members of the motorized recreation community started a campaign aimed at defeating wildlife crossings and associated fencing. The county asked voters to weigh in through a nonbinding advisory vote in November 2018. Wildlife crossings and the associated fencing became the most divisive issue of the election season, and voters strongly opposed wildlife crossings. Within weeks, ITD's Environmental Assessment selected a preferred alternative with Animal Detection Systems with no associated fencing, and claimed no further responsibility to address wildlife vehicle collisions in their remaining highway expansion plans. This is a case study from the perspective of a lead conservation organization on what worked, what turned, what lessons were learned, and what opportunity still lies ahead.