Tooele animal control officer Debra Bush recently made the case that Tooele Valley is in need of a large, centralized animal shelter (“Animal control officer pitches plan for valleywide shelter,” July 29). She’s right. The current system is fragmented and confusing. In some cases, it’s simply inadequate.

Animal control issues aren’t generally at the forefront of public concern, particularly during an economic downturn. Our four-legged friends nonetheless have a significant impact on the community. Ignoring the problems arising from overcrowded kennels and multiple jurisdictions is simply not an option. Pet ownership is a custom most of us take part in and all of us are affected by. Meeting the demands of a growing animal population is a collective responsibility, and a valleywide shelter is the best way to meet current needs.

Bush puts forth specific reasons why the change is needed, but many of us have experienced the deficiencies in the current system firsthand. The valley is home to three separate animal facilities: one belongs to Tooele, one to Grantsville and the third is run by the county. If the setup sounds simple enough, it isn’t. Tooele’s shelter is located in Erda, while the county facility sits within the borders of Tooele. Needless to say, the arrangement often gives rise to jurisdictional pandemonium, both in matters of licensing and animal pickup.

Grantsville’s shelter resides appropriately within city borders, but is woefully understaffed and overrun. Without sufficient funding for a full-time staff, the facility is primarily run by volunteers. Overcrowding is such an issue that foster families must frequently be enlisted.

But shelter overcrowding has become a problem valleywide, as the stray population continues to increase. When excess animals can’t be housed, the alternative is to put them down. Without invoking PITA-style cries of holocaust, needless loss of life in any form ought to weigh heavily on the public mind. In most cases, the “humane” termination of animals is unnecessary given a little more human consideration and forethought.

Bush’s solution to these growing problems is a sensible one. Local animal control has to be revamped for capacity and efficiency, and her proposal would accomplish both. An animal shelter large enough to serve the entire valley would alleviate existing complications. Officers could spend less time deciding which animals go where, and residents would know exactly where to go for licensing or to search for a missing pet. A spacious new facility would also provide more animals a temporary home until they could be rescued. Increasingly, the capacity of existing shelters simply isn’t adequate.

Such an endeavor won’t come cheap, nor will it happen overnight. Large-scale projects should be carefully weighed even in the best of times. At present, pulling together the needed resources may not be viable. That doesn’t mean we can’t start planning. Prudent as proper timing may be, a centralized, high capacity animal shelter can’t be allowed to slip into the “maybe someday” consignment of nifty ideas. As long as Tooele Valley is home to the furry companions common to any community, the need for streamlined animal control will only grow.

In the coming years, a valleywide shelter will be more than a good idea. It will be a necessity.

Matt Rowley is a teacher at Copper Canyon Elementary who lives in Tooele. He can be reached at matrowl@yahoo.com.