Dog-race ban question a numbers war

LYNN – Massachusetts’ voters decide on Nov. 4 if dashing around a track is “playtime” for greyhounds or a sport injurious to the dogs’ health that should be banned.Three animal rights organizations calling themselves the Committee to Protect Dogs wants voters to vote yes on Question 3, a ballot referendum phasing out the greyhound racing industry by January 2010.Proponents claim greyhounds raced at Wonderland Greyhound Park and other tracks live in small cages and suffer serious, even fatal, injuries from on-track collisions.”Ultimately, we are asking voters, ‘Would you treat your dog this way,'” said Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals spokesman Kara Holmquist.Kennel operator John O’Donnell has a different perspective on the industry that includes his family’s business off Western Avenue by the Saugus River.”Running is the dog’s playtime. It’s what they love to do.”O’Donnell said Question 3 will put 1,100 workers at Wonderland and Raynham Park out of work, as well as kennel operators and suppliers.The Committee cites state statistics indicating seven Massachusetts race tracks employ 707 workers. Money set aside in existing state trusts would be used under the Committee’s proposal to provide retraining for track workers.”We take a ballot question that displaces workers very seriously but this is an industry that is in decline,” Holmquist said.Racing opponents lost a 2000 referendum bid to ban the sport. The Committee organized 3,000 supporters in gathering 150,000 signatures last fall and this past spring to put Question 3 on the ballot.They included Lynn resident Nancy Johnson, who owns a former racing greyhound named Sky.”I’d say the response I get from people about the question is 80 percent positive with people sayings dogs are mistreated,” she said.The Committee claims 832 greyhounds were injured racing since 2002. O’Donnell says 714 were hurt between 2002 and 2007 out of 465,000 dogs racing in the industry during that time period.He also questions the Committee’s claims about inhumane confinement and notes that kennel cage size is agreed upon by industry and racing ban representatives in 2001 are larger than many cage sizes used by pet stores.Question 3 supporters and opponents also disagree over adoption rates for racing dogs, with Committee members questioning industry claims that 100 percent of the dogs are adopted.”We think once people get the information, they will vote on the side of the dogs,” Holmquist said.O’Donnell said Question 3’s passage means uprooting his family, including two daughters attending local schools, and moving to another racing state like Florida.”I grew up in this business,” he said.