Last Updated: December 21, 2017, 3:50 pm

The Skewed Review: Elections should not be catalysts to fix problems

By:


Every dog may have his day, but in St. George, that day only came because of an election year.

St. George Animal Shelter is a place tasked with keeping animals safe and healthy. You know, it’s that place where lost or stray puppies and kittens can go when they’re homeless and have nothing to eat, correct? They can expect to at least get food and proper veterinary care, yes?

Well, up until a few weeks ago, that wasn’t really the case. In fact, if we believe some sources, the St. George Animal Shelter is a place even the most good-ole-boy southern Utah politician wouldn’t send his most Democratic opponent.

Allegedly, there has been animal mistreatment there for years, and until a candidate for St. George City Council brought the issue to light, nobody was doing much about it. Yes, it took a race for public office to put a stop to things such as kennels being hosed out with animals still inside them, wounds and sores left to their own devices in lieu of proper veterinary care, and euthanasia without any means of anesthesia.

So, would anything have been done about it if nobody were getting elected?

The answer is simple: No.

If someone really were up in arms over the mistreatment of animals, then something would have been done about the shelter before now. But apparently, all the folks who call themselves animal rights activists just felt the need to complain every once in a while and not follow through on anything. 

Which could  — hypothetically, of course  — actually mean something else altogether. Was there really, actually abuse going on at the animal shelter? All signs point to yes, but it could also be a drummed-up issue to support a political campaign. 

In either scenario, the motivation just isn’t correct. In the end, measures are being taken to ensure the animals at the shelter are treated correctly.

For the animals’ sake, I say thank heaven this was an election year.

Maybe the citizens who take serious issue with policies and procedures in this town should take their issues to both elected officials and citizens alike. And maybe our current elected officials should act on the will of the people — even if it’s not an election year.

The council members who are running get a split review this week. For doing good in the case of the animal shelter, I’m giving them each four paws up and a generous wagging of my tail.

Once I’ve had my tail surgically removed, then I’m afraid I’m going to have to scrutinize each candidate who suddenly called foul on the shelter. I really need to know if these candidates have been seeking justice for the animals even before they ran for office.

Or are they just taking advantage of an issue in order to get into office? I guess at this point in American history, that practice is canon. 

Comments