End of the line for dog racing
BY ALEX SPEREDELOZZI FOR THE SUN CHRONICLE
Thursday, November 6, 2008 2:37 AM EST
A greyhound waits to race at Raynham-Taunton Dog Track on Wednesday. Greyhound racing will no longer be allowed in Massachusetts come 2010. (Staff photo by Mike George)
Patrons, workers worried in wake of vote to ban sport
RAYNHAM - At Raynham Park, the sun barely peaked through thin clouds early Wednesday afternoon, one day after Massachusetts voted to ban greyhound dog racing. The decision requires Raynham Park to shut down racing by Jan. 1, 2010.
Though it was business as usual at the races, and employees and patrons readied themselves for the 12:30 p.m. start of the first afternoon race, track employees were dismayed by passage of the Greyhound Protection Act, also known as Question 3 on the state ballot.
"Very, very subdued," track Superintendent Tom Clifford said, describing the mood among employees.
Raynham Park employs 650 to 700 part- and full-time employees, said Clifford, who lives in Rehoboth and has worked at the track for 32 years.
Most of those jobs would be lost, he said. "Not a whole lot salvageable. A lot of people who are long-term employees have been let down by fellow citizens."
"We genuinely do the right thing by the dogs," he said. "We do a great job taking care of our greyhounds and our customers. No greyhounds are euthanized. All are found loving homes."
Though there's been talk about other avenues for revenue at the track, such as slot machines, no plans have been set. There is interest in simulcast betting, but the mandate does not allow for simulcasts without live racing, Clifford said.
Other employees echoed Clifford's sentiments.
Cheryl Bonaparte, a 24-year employee from Raynham, became teary-eyed, saying she was "devastated."
"I'm from the typewriter age, not the computer age," she said.
Bonaparte is a parimutuel clerk, serving customers who place bets.
"I can't believe people voted that way, putting us out of work," she said. "I have a mortgage, a child in college. I haven't slept, crying all night."
Track announcer Chris Roberts of Raynham said the new law would not protect greyhounds, but simply cause them to be relocated to other states where adoption requirements are not as stringent. Roberts said the dogs are only raced until they are 4 years old, and he cited Raynham Park's 100 percent adoption rate.
"We like to think we're for the dogs. We care about the dogs," he said.
Roberts, a 10-year employee, said his work hours give him the flexibility to officiate at high school basketball and baseball games.
"Utter devastation" is how he described the ban, and wondered aloud "how someone from Framingham, Chicopee, Pittsfield could determine the loss of 1,200 jobs.
"You tell me, in this economy, where are the businesses to hire 1,000 people," he said. "These people are family. The saddest day will be the day these doors close."
Gerald Read from Swansea, who worked the polls on Tuesday in Fall River to persuade voters to reject the ban, said he began working at age 18 - 56 years ago - parking cars with his father. He works now as a parimutuel clerk five hours a day, six days a week.
"Where am I going to get a job now at 74," he said.
Not as angry, but still disappointed on Wednesday were some of the patrons at Raynham Park.
"I don't like it," said Clarence Thomas from Stoughton who has been coming to the track since the 1980s.
Thomas attends races four times a week. He works second shift at the Stop & Shop warehouse in Freetown, so his days are free.
"Me and the friends come down here and have a few beers, some relaxation," he said.
If the track closes, Thomas said he may go to Foxwoods. "Next best thing," he said.
Bob Collett, who lives in Mashpee part of the year and winters in Florida, has been coming to the track for 40 years.
"It's too bad," he said. "Now I'll probably have to live in Florida full-time to see them (greyhounds) live."
As the first race got underway, and the familiar "Here comes Rusty" blared from the speakers, Jack Eordekian looked at his program and the two tickets he just purchased.
"Too bad the vote turned out that way," he said, despite admitting he voted "yes" on Question 3 himself.
Eordekian said he voted for the ban because his 13-year-old granddaughter became active in the push to ban greyhound racing.
"You're doing the wrong thing, Papa, going to the race track," he said she told him.
"If I thought they were abusing dogs, I wouldn't come here," said the 82-year-old man from Watertown. "I did it for her. I didn't think my vote would make a difference."
View Comments » No comments posted.
« Hide Comments
ricknkim wrote on Nov 11, 2008 9:31 AM:
jose21 wrote on Nov 10, 2008 3:51 PM:
ricknkim wrote on Nov 10, 2008 9:40 AM:
Being on the top of the food chain and the utility use of animals is completely different than the entertainment use of them. "
saywhat wrote on Nov 7, 2008 1:28 PM:
kingston73 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:54 PM:
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:45 PM:
I'm not good at listeningYou are an idiot. It's funny how you wont comment on the other ways in which animals are used for entertainment. Dog shows, Horse back riding, etc. At times these events take place in stadiums. Oh by the way. Most animals were breed for utilitarian purposes. But since we no longer need them to hunt, maybe it doesn't make sense to keep them as pets either. "
hope2008 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:42 PM:
kingston73 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:19 PM:
kingston73 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:16 PM:
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:02 PM:
To your point that dogs are pack animals. I agree. Every race there is a pack of 8. The leader wins and the others follow. "
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 8:47 PM:
My argument makes no sense! I'd like to think that I can speak first hand to this issue. I was an assistant trainer in the past and saw how these dogs were cared for. They were turned out 5 times daily and on many occasions were let to run free in an open field. That's more exercise than my jack-russel gets. Since we are now in the business of banning pets for the purpose of entertainment , why stop here. Maybe we should eliminate the westminster dog show or remove the equestrian aspect of the Olympics. Better yet maybe I should stop playing fetch with my own dog. I wouldn't want to be "entertained" by her. "
kingston73 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 7:40 PM:
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 7:27 PM:
Obama, the decriminalization of pot, gay marriage. You probably voted for the income tax. We just lost 1000 jobs. where will that revenue come from to support your enlightened liberal agenda. ( Oh by the way California must be more enlightened than we are.) You say that animals are not here to serve us. What type of shoes do you wear? what is the interior of your car. What is the couch you sit on made of? I guess you don't take the time to consider that. "
saywhat wrote on Nov 6, 2008 5:55 PM:
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 5:20 PM:
You must be a vegetarian. Have you inhaled within the last minute. I hope you wear hemp shoes. Oh no you just inhaled some microrganism. that life form didn't choose to be consumed by you.Life is life. Using your train of thought. That microrganism has the same value as you. Probably does. Go live in your bubble. "
winnawinnachickendinna wrote on Nov 6, 2008 4:46 PM:
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 4:32 PM:
sunrise22 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 4:30 PM:
winnawinnachickendinna wrote on Nov 6, 2008 4:15 PM:
saywhat wrote on Nov 6, 2008 3:52 PM:
"Heaven is by favor; if it were by merit your dog would go in and you would stay out. Of all the creatures ever made [man] is the most detestable. Of the entire brood, he is the only one... that possesses malice. He is the only creature that inflicts pain for sport, knowing it to be pain. ~Mark Twain
"Life is life - whether in a cat, or dog or man. There is no difference there between a cat or a man. The idea of difference is a human conception for man's own advantage. ~Sri Aurobindo "
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 3:50 PM:
I believe this won't take effect until 2010? I think there will be career counseling and job placement services also? Unemployment benefits in the worst case? The positions for the most part are non-skilled, therefore can't they transition to numerous other non-skilled jobs?
Not sure anyone likes to see people lose their job and concluding that those who supported the ballot question do is complete rubbish. "
buda1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 3:35 PM:
sunrise22 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 3:25 PM:
you think that everyone got their info based on "tainted info," why do you keep saying that? You think that YOUR ideas and info are the straight truth? And with this whole thing you said about adoption...why dont you stop contributing to the overpopulation of dogs? Oh..is it about how much money you make off of one of those labs? And yes, in this case, I belive the dogs are more important. If they were taken care of, I wouldnt have voted yes. "
buda1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 2:58 PM:
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 2:54 PM:
dayrider wrote on Nov 6, 2008 2:01 PM:
sunrise22 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:46 PM:
sunrise22 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:42 PM:
You see, horse racing makes soooo much money, that there will never be a vote on wheather or not to keep it. Just like how cigarettes and porn will never be illegal. So since this industry IS going downhill, we were allowed to vote on it. "
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:40 PM:
I hunt for recreation yes, but eat the meat that I would otherwise procure at the grocery store. I'm not eating any more or less than I would if I did not hunt.
Much land is now off-limits to hunting. I make other arrangements by traveling out of state to hunt on a friends spread or on state land where it is legal. If it were made impossible to hunt legally, I'd either move or make trips to where I could hunt as part of my vacation.
I'm not gloating that it passed, I am pleased though. If it hadn't passed I would have accepted that, not call people idiots because they won?? Whether it is 18 hours a day or 20 - I still view it as wrong. "
mmarcia wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:29 PM:
So, are these groups going to find job for the 1,000 or so direct employees- and the dozens of related businesses that will suffer? "
buda1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:07 PM:
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:06 PM:
Have you ever been to a dairy or a chicken farm? Those animals live in very tight quarters. I am sure that some pets sleep in cages .I didn't know that we as a society are against entertainment. Do you hunt because there isn't enough food at the grocery store. Or is hunting your form of entertainment. I am not against hunting. But how upset would you be if the Governent decided to close all lands to hunting because they arbitrarily decided that hunting was inhumane. Many people enjoy watching dogs and horses race. Many people derive their incomes from racing. Should we set out on an agenda to ban all forms of entertainment. Imagine the economic consequencs of that. "
buda1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:04 PM:
hardhearted wrote on Nov 6, 2008 12:23 PM:
If the industry was dieing, why did we need this law? Just because you don't go to the track or you "don't agree" with the concept of dog racing it's okay to put people out of work?
Have you seen a racehorse stall? Not very large when you consider the size of a horse and the fact that they like to run. I have yet to see a move to ban horse racing? "
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 12:12 PM:
sunrise22 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 12:05 PM:
john1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 12:04 PM:
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 11:24 AM:
sabdab wrote on Nov 6, 2008 10:59 AM:
Anyone who has purchased a puppy in the last 10 years has been told to crate train the puppy. This means putting your puppy in the crate when not being walked, fed or played with. They sleep in the crate, stay in the crate during the day while everyone is at work... how many hours a day does that equate to??? (8-10 hours at night, 8-10 hours during the day)... hummmmmm is this inhumane? And if you crate train your puppy, they wont give it up easily... they will use it for years and years if you let them.
The fact is, dogs like to have a small area they feel safe in, they like to curl up where they know they won't get spooked, stepped on, distrubed etc.
If someone decides to go into greyhound racing, how much do you think they pay for the dog, vet, care??? Your not going to abuse something that is an investment of tens of thousands of dollars... and this is not going to end racing... they will just move to where the tracks are and leave MASS with less revenue again. MASS lost out on this deal. "
hardhearted wrote on Nov 6, 2008 10:50 AM:
What's next-- ban the police from using dogs for crowd control, hunting suspects, finding lost kids and bomb sniffing?
How many cops and servicemen have been saved by working dogs? Those dogs work under harsher conditions than greyhounds.
Just because some extremists phony up some documents about cruelty to dogs in other parts of the world we have to shut down humane, tax-paying businesses.
I also agree with the writers that say this is not about dogs but rather a clash of classes. If they were worried about animal cruelty why haven't they gone against horse racing? "
rcharles wrote on Nov 6, 2008 10:34 AM:
ricknkim wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:15 AM:
buda1 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 9:04 AM:
Hojo20 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 8:38 AM:
hope2008 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 8:28 AM:
Now, in the supposed name of balanced journalism, lets see the mandated state report of racing dogs injuries and deaths, printed on the front page of the Sun. Lets get a close up look at the real tragedy. This is a brutal industry and the voters of Massachusetts did their homework, studied the reports on the industry and voted to end this barbaric and outdated so-called "sport." It's about time. So....lets see the report. Otherwise, you can read it online. "
HARRY HINDSIGHT wrote on Nov 6, 2008 7:50 AM:
Wasn't the dog tracks also tied into the lottery? So now the state will have the lost revenue from dog racing, just how will they make that money up? I think a casino comming to a former dog track near you. Too bad the Tauton track burnt / got torn down, it would be another great venue with pleanty of parking! "
outfall1945 wrote on Nov 6, 2008 6:16 AM: