By DERRICK Z. JACKSON
Boston Globe
Published on: 08/23/07

As Michael Vick plummets from celebrity to our national symbol of animal cruelty, there is an unsettling question unanswered in all of the press coverage. Was he uniquely brutal, or merely a spectacular outlier for canine atrocities we allow every day?

This is not an apology for Vick and his dogfighting accomplices. The acts of hanging, drowning, electrocuting and shooting pit bulls, just because they did not win, easily calls for prison, penance and other impoverishment, not to mention many therapists.

Greyhound racing -- a legal $2 billion business -- should receive just as much criticism as the horrible acts noted in the Michael Vick indictment, columnist argues.

But the national outrage rings a bit hollow. It feels a bit too easy to condemn only this fool sick enough to throw away a 10-year, $130 million football contract with the Atlanta Falcons and his residual millions in endorsements for his mad dashes as quarterback.

It feels a bit easy because I am a former owner of a rescued greyhound.

You can go down last month's 18-page federal indictment against Vick and his codefendants and see plenty of snippets such as these: "train and breed ... for ... competitions"; "destroying or otherwise disposing of dogs not selected to stay"; "executed at least one dog that did not perform well"; "executed at least two dogs that did not perform well"; "Vick possessed ... approximately 54 American Pit Bull Terriers, some of which had scars and injuries."

Of course, you can apply the same phrases or similar ones to greyhound racing. Yet dog tracks operate in about a quarter of our states, including Massachusetts. In 2000, animal rights activists were able to place a ballot question before the Commonwealth's voters to ban greyhound racing. Supporters of racing outspent the activists by nearly 4-to-1 and barely beat back the proposed ban, 51 percent to 49 percent.

Activists this month submitted an initiative petition to Attorney General Martha Coakley to put a ban back on a statewide ballot, reasserting that "commercial dog racing is cruel and inhumane." How cruel and inhumane is a bitter debate.

The California-based Greyhound Protection League estimates that in the two decades from 1986-2005, 606,633 dogs from the industry were killed: 184,604 puppies judged to be inferior for racing and 421,129 after their "careers" ended, usually by 4 years old.

Things are nowhere as bad as they once were. In its worst years, critics said greyhound racing was death row for dogs. The Web site of the Greyhound Racing Association of America says that the peak year for the sport was 1992, when $3.5 billion was bet at more than 50 tracks. That year happened to come right at the end of a frenzied era in which, according to the Greyhound Protection League, between 42,000 and 58,000 dogs were killed in the search for winners.

The Greyhound Racing Association says that dog betting, which is being supplanted by other forms of legalized gambling, is down to about $2 billion at about 40 tracks. Hammered by bad publicity from animal rights groups, the killing of dogs has dropped dramatically, down to 12,000 in 2005, according to the Greyhound Protection League.

The Greyhound Racing Association and industry defenders deny there was ever any mass abuse. They say that 90 percent of greyhounds are either adopted or kept alive for breeding. But over the years, there have been dreadful stories, such as the man in Alabama who was arrested in 2002 for slaughtering up to 3,000 used-up or losing dogs from the Florida tracks over a 10-year span.

Throughout the 1990s, there were several news reports of mass killings, dog abandonments and squalid kennel conditions. One trainer said that alleged dog electrocutions at one Idaho track were akin to Auschwitz.

Those reports include the 1,200 over-the-hill greyhounds that were dumped on a Pittsfield shelter from 1986 to 1991. In 2000, the Globe quoted John Perrault, the shelter manager for the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on the conditions at Pittsfield. "I saw wounds, gashes, infections, broken legs that were left untreated. I saw dehydration, starvation, infestation of parasites. ..." Perrault said. "Owners made it clear they wanted the dogs killed."

There is no difference between this and what Vick did, other than that dogfighting is illegal and greyhound racing remains legal in many states. For his depraved hobby, Vick will be shamed with prison stripes. Greyhound racing, despite its primitive exploitation of dogs, remains a $2 billion business even today.

I dont think that this is a subject that I want to get into. Too many variables, too many differences of opinion. My brain hurts to think about it

Proof positive of this old adage

I'm not touching this one!!

Comparing dog racing to dog fighting is comparing apples to oranges. And it's sophomoric.

Racing dogs are bred and trained to race, and hopefully, win. If I understand race rules correctly, when a racing dog intentionally interferes with another dog on the track (aggressive, tries to fight, etc), the dog is penalized. If it happens repeatedly, the dog is retired. The competitive spirit is bred for and encouraged, but the "take it out on another dog" is not.

Fighting dogs are bred and trained to inflict as much damage as possible on the other dog, and ultimately, to kill the other dog. They're trained by giving them small dogs and cats to kill, by beatings, and anything else that will amplify their already aggressive natures.

Through public scrutiny, increased education and enforced regulation throughout the race industry, and many, many compassionate people, greyhound racing is becoming safer and healthier for the vast majority of hounds. And continues to do so.

I don't care how much scrutiny, education, regulation and compassion is applied to dog fighting, the ultimate goal in a dog fight is for one dog to kill another. It'll NEVER be a kinder, gentler "sport."

If that author of the editorial wanted to make comparisons about the atrocities humans commit in the name of "sport" there are plenty of other valid options. One that comes to mind is exotic animal hunting in 5 acre enclosed parks.

Well anyone that quotes statistics from the GPL loses all credibility with me.

What a dumb comparison. At a greyhound track, when a race is run, all eight dogs go back to their crate happy and healthy. At the end of a dogfight, one of the dogs is considerably injured, and the other is dead. Yeah, THOSE two sports are almost the same thing....

U-m-m-m-m, "The Boston Globe" That pretty much says it all.

The following is forwarded on behalf of Gary Guccione, Communications Coordinator, American Greyhound Council, in response to a recent column written by Boston Globe columnist Derrick Z. Jackson. The column, which was syndicated and published in other newspapers, drew an egregiously unfair parallel between Michael Vick’s crimes and the legal, regulated sport of Greyhound racing. Boston Globe story.

Dear Editor:

It is disturbing that Michael Vick’s misguided participation in illegal and inhumane dog fighting has become a pretext for attacking responsible, legal animal use industries.

Boston Globe writer Derrick Z. Jackson’s recent column comparing Greyhound racing to illegal dog fighting was completely lacking in fairness or balance, and grossly unfair to the Greyhound racing community. It read more like radical propaganda than thoughtful commentary.

The legal and highly regulated Greyhound racing industry takes its responsibilities seriously, as animal stewards as well as taxpaying employers. Greyhound racetracks employed almost 15,000 people and paid almost $272 million in taxes in 2006, according to an annual report released earlier this week by the American Greyhound Track Operators Association (AGTOA). The annual payroll of these tracks was more than $194 million; spent nearly $357 million on goods and services.

Through the American Greyhound Council (AGC), Greyhound track operators, breeders and trainers have invested more than $7 million in recent years on Greyhound health and welfare programs ranging from breeding farm inspections to canine bone cancer research, veterinary symposia and web-based Greyhound health resources. The industry spends over $1.4 million annually to support Greyhound adoption activities.

It is in the Greyhound welfare area that Derrick Jackson’s column was most egregiously unfair. Intentionally or not, Jackson apparently allowed himself to be used as a tool by the Greyhound Protection League (GPL), an extreme organization that has become famous for its hysterical condemnation of Greyhound racing without regard to the facts.

The vast majority of people in Greyhound racing are in the business because they love Greyhounds and are fully committed to responsible animal care. In the rare cases where industry members are found guilty of serious animal welfare violations, they are banned from the sport for life, and other industry members are prohibited from doing business with them. Few other fields, including journalism, deal with ethical violations so harshly.

Fortunately, groups like GPL are becoming increasingly marginalized, as mainstream animal welfare groups recognize the benefits of cooperation with the racing community for the benefit of the Greyhounds. The American Greyhound Council and individual tracks across the U.S. work side by side with hundreds of adoption groups around the country to find loving homes for retired Greyhounds.

Thanks to these joint efforts, more than 90 percent of all registered Greyhounds are either adopted or returned to the farm as pets or breeders when they retire. That’s a success story your readers will never hear from GPL or Mr. Jackson.

Sincerely, Gary Guccione

Thank you!!!!!!