On Greyhounds and the Economy

Supporters of a ban on Greyhound racing in Massachusetts have submitted 45,000 signatures (11,099 were needed) and in November the people will decide whether or not to shut down Raynham-Taunton and Wonderland Greyhound Parks (yes, "park" is part of the name). Or at least you’d think that’s how it would happen, but a lawsuit, courtesy of the dog track owners, is pending.

If on the ballot and approved, the measure would close the tracks down by January 1, 2010. George Carney has been the owner of the Raynham-Taunton track for 40 years.

If the court does not block the measure this year, Carney said he will wage a multimillion dollar advertising campaign to swing voters against the measure. He said that at his track there are about 650 full- and part-time workers, jobs that would be lost if the ban was approved.

"I feel the economy is in our favor," Carney said.

Of course, a bill to add slots at the tracks to prop them up is already in the works, and a plea has been made to supporters of racing "for dramatic action to reverse a years-long slide in attendance at races."

Though public opinion appears to be against the dog tracks (evidenced by the dwindling attendance), fears about the economy are going to work for the track owners. They will use the unstable economy and their 650 full- and part-time workers to their advantage. "You don’t want people to lose their jobs in an already terrible economy, do you? Do you want to be responsible for that?"

What I would want to ask each voter in Massachusetts is: Would you want your dog to be kenneled, lying on shredded newspaper, and muzzled for some or all of 22 hours a day, possibly drugged, forced to run when someone else wants her to run, denied veterinary treatment as it’s cost-prohibitive, and then "discarded" when she wasn’t fast enough? Forget about the broken bones, cardiac arrest and paralysis. Forget the killing of thousands of dogs who were never fast enough to make it to the track. Forget the mass graves full of dogs and the dogs found, injured or dead, with their ears cut off (that’s where their tattoos are). Do you think it is right to force your dog to race because you want her to race? Because you might profit?

If the answer were No, then they’d have no choice but to vote to shut down the tracks (if they wanted to act in alignment with their beliefs).

But if the answer were Yes, I’d ask: Do you think it’s right to hold a human person captive and force her to race because you want her to race? Because you might profit? And if not, why not?

Because dogs aren’t human? True, true. But so what? Might humans and dogs have something in common that’s crucial to this issue?

I think I can name one thing: They have an interest in not being held captive by someone with the intention of profiting from their natural inclinations or their skills. And if you agree with that, you’d have to vote to shut down the tracks if you wanted to align your actions with your beliefs.

People can get new jobs all by themselves. They can relocate if they choose to. They can get trained for a new career if they have the inclination, the time and the resources (and some programs are free!). But the dogs cannot choose to leave the tracks. They need the voters to speak for their interests.