Comment on FR Doc # 2011-13684

It is understandable that farmers are able to remove prairie dogs from their lands--for economic and safety reasons. Why do those same economic and safety considerations not apply to other real property owners? For example, the existence of prairie dogs on a farmer's land inhibit a farmer's ability to earn a living while also threatening the safety and well being of his livestock. Similarly, the existence of prairie dogs on a person's property located that is not irrigated similarly threaten's said property owners ability to sell or use that property, while also threatening the safety and well being of pets and humans. Hence, it only seems logical that, with more than 5,000 adult dogs in Iron County ALONE at that last count, that we could relocate ALL of the animals currently on private property to public lands and wind up with enough animals to keep them off of the Endangered Species List (1100?). The burden to property owners with prairie dogs on their land (or even adjoining property owners that don't have prairie dogs on their land for that matter) should not be taken lightly. For example, many people cannot find a buyer for a property that has prairie dogs on or or adjoins a lot that has them on it. Many people in this area are forced to purchase and install prairie dog fencing to keep prairie dogs off of their lot, so they don't wind up with a lot they can't build on. Lastly, there is a shifting tax burden that is placed on every resident in this county--whether they have prairie dogs or not. Many of those with prairie dogs have successfully petitioned the state and county tax assessor and had their property taxes reduced to almost nothing--and those taxes are then shifted to people who don't have prairie dogs on their property. Something MUST be done--the economic impact of this issue on this area has been MASSIVE and the current policy to "recover' the Utah Prairie Dog has not and does not work. Please help!