Comment on FR Doc # 2012-09884

As a local agency directly affected by the rule we oppose restricting take conditions. We have worked with federal and state agencies to use the existing 4d rule to trap and translocate prairie dogs in an effort to protect the species. Additional restrictions will result in degradation of the species. The rule needs to expand the take provisions to public lands, public properties and private lands where translocation of the UPD is less impacting to the species. Many property owners impacted by the species would be willing to have the prairie dogs trapped and translocated to acceptable areas. However the current agricultural restrictions prevent that action. The new rule should allow federal, state and local officials to work together to move the animals to locations where their sustainability is more reliable. Prairie dogs will benefit if we are able to continue our program and expand it to additonal properties. Additionally, the secretary should take our efforts into account before revising the rule. There is also some evidence that the rule should be consistent with state and local plans/policies/programs to the extent allowed by law. Expanding the rule to include additional properties where the species is causing damage - especially when trapping and translocating are the preferred method - will meet that collabotative requirement.