Ballot initiative rejected by court because it also contains provisions against dog fighting and cruelty to service dogs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The highest court in Massachusetts has ruled that an initiative to protect dogs and ban greyhound racing may not be put on the November ballot, even though animal welfare groups collected far more than the required number of signatures.
More than 150,000 signatures were collected in support of a November vote on the Dog Protection Act, which is supported by welfare groups including the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (MSPCA), GREY2K USA, the Humane Society of the United States, and the Animal Rescue League of Boston.
The act would phase out dog racing, strengthen laws against dogfighting, and increase criminal penalties for harming law enforcement and service dogs.
However, the state’s Supreme Judicial Court ruled Thursday that the question may not be placed on the ballot, finding that it violated a provision in the state constitution that prohibits citizen ballot initiatives that include multiple, unrelated subjects.
"We're extremely surprised and disappointed that Massachusetts voters will not be permitted to vote to protect dogs in November," Christine Dorchak told the Associated Press in reaction to the decision. Dorchak is chairman of the Committee to Protect Dogs, an organization formed to lobby for passage of the act.
The court found that it was unfair to voters to combine the question on dog-racing with provisions to increase penalties for dog-fighting and abuse of service animals.
The challenge to the ballot initiative was brought by George Carney, owner of the Raynham-Taunton Greyhound Park, one of the two greyhound racing facilities that would have been shut down had the initiative passed. Carney had argued that the amendments to cruelty laws were included as a “smoke screen” to confuse voters and aid in the passage of the more controversial racing ban.
However, animal welfare groups maintained that the Dog Protection Act did not contain multiple, unrelated subjects, since all of its provisions are related to ending cruelty against dogs.
The Committee to Protect Dogs argued that new state records on greyhound injuries supported their claim that racing was tantamount to cruelty against dogs.
"New state records show that hundreds of greyhounds are seriously injured while racing in Massachusetts, including dogs that suffer broken legs, cardiac arrest, seizures and spinal cord paralysis,” Dorchak said.
Nationwide, greyhound welfare groups maintain that as many as 20,000 dogs are euthanized every year as a by-product of the racing industry, as dogs are disposed of once they are no longer profitable. They also maintain that dogs at racetracks are caged in stacked crates for as long as 22 hours per day, and transported long distances in inhumane conditions.
For more information on the cruelty of the greyhound racing industry, see GREY2K USA. In 2000, Massachusetts voters narrowly defeated a ballot initiative that only focused on banning greyhound racing -- by a margin of 48.6 percent to 46.7 percent.
Animal welfare activists said that although the court’s decision Thursday is a disappointment, they will not give up.
"It's a setback, but we certainly will not give up in trying to move forward on creating these protections for the dogs in our Commonwealth," Kara Holmquist, director of advocacy for the MSPCA told the AP.