Position
Paper
Senate Bill
626 (S-5)
The
S-5 of Senate Bill 626 as written.
This
legislation prohibits certain dog races; prohibits the simulcasting of certain
dog races; and prescribes penalties. “A
person shall not hold, conduct, or operate dog racing for the purpose of
wagering or gambling.”
Wagering or
gambling in the bill is not clearly defined [Sec. 1 (c)] even though it does
make a statement of what the law does not include. (Does not include the payment of a purse or
prize to the owner, manager, or trainer of a dog in connection with a race in
which the dog races.)
This statement is not helpful for the
owner, manager, or trainer to understand what other activities may be prohibited
as wagering or gambling as defined in a standard dictionary. Does MCL 750.307 Gambling: prima facie evidence
apply?
Quoted from the WEBSTER’S NEW WORLD
DICTIONARY of American English (
York
copyright 1994:
Wager n.
1. Bet: 2. a pledge to do something or abide by an
outcome:
Gamble vi. 1. to play games of chance for money.
2. to take a risk in order to gain some advantage. vt. to risk in gambling; bet,
wager; n. an act or undertaking involving risk or a
loss.
The dog
industry, one of the most economically important animal industries in
activities such as conformation shows, obedience trials, hunting trials, sled
dog racing, and others that meets the definition “to take a risk in order to gain some
advantage.” What are some of these
advantages?
- Pride and satisfaction of
owning an animal of distinction.>> - A means of advertising the
performance, appearance and/or of the owner’s breeding
program.
>> - Enjoyment of the
opportunities for recreational activities with their dogs.>> - For breeders, the
opportunity to increase the reputation of their dogs by demonstrating their
performance in competitive events, resulting in increased sales of dogs. Cash entry fees (risks) are a general
requirement for participation. This cost
is used to finance the cost of the competition and pay the costs of the awards
to the winners.>>
The
competitive public events sponsored by
risk to gain some advantage” could result in a violation of this act. Practically all of these competitive events
require the entrant to pay a fee. There
is no guarantee of a win with such a fee.
Thus all that money is essentially at risk to the exhibitor of any dogs
entered in the competition.
The Michigan
Association for Pure Bred Dogs and the Michigan Hunting Dog Federation are
composed
of over 100
clubs that are located throughout
recreational activities that could be interpreted as violating this act, either
by the club, their exhibitors or guests, depending upon the interpretation of
the words “gambling” and “betting” and “wagering.” The events attract entries from throughout
the
States
A very important
attraction.
The
information provided by the proponents of the bill at the hearing of the
Committee on Commerce and Tourism on
2008ATE>:
SB 626 –
Information Sheet – no author given)
SB 626 – Selection of Relevant News
Articles (no author
given)
raised some
disturbing questions about the true purpose of this legislation and its effect
on other forms of recreational and competitive activities of the dog
industry..
The statement
within SB 626 – Information Sheet,
[the paragraph entitled “What this legislation is NOT intended to
do: – Represent the interest or further the cause of any particular
organization, animal rights group, rescue or other animal welfare entity”]
plus the text of the document [“SB
626 ? Selection off Relevant News Articles”] is a more plausible explanation of the
real intent of the legislation’s supporters.
The thrust of these documents is mainly related to propaganda from
anti-racing organizations with a biased animal activist view of the risks dog
are exposed to in the “racing
sports.”
The risks and
perils of greyhound racing are no different from those of other forms of
competitive activities. Similar risks
are encountered in other racing events such as sled dog races, coon hound races,
lure coursing and agility trials, If
this legislation is enacted in Michigan in the current session (it was rejected
in the 1996 session) the animal rights lobby’s next effort will be to stop sled
dog racing, then coon hound racing. All
under the guise of preventing gambling and cruelty. The animal rights proponents
are already trying to stop sled dog racing events with accusations of it being
cruel to sled dogs. Next to be
prohibited will be hunting events (dogs used in large game hunting are at
considerable risk.) Then, the
legislature will be asked to outlaw hunting, one of the ultimate goals of the
animal rights agenda.
The Michigan
Association for Pure Bred Dogs and the Michigan Hunting Dog Federation urge you
to defeat SB 626. If the sport of dog
racing is detrimental to the public as a gambling and wagering event, then ban
other forms of gambling supported by
cruelty, then all animal racing events such as horse racing, and indeed, even
boat racing would be considered cruel and should be prohibited (to save the fish
who are at risk for damage from propellers.)
These bans could also be extended to training and competing with horses
in timed international Olympic events.
They too have risks of serious injury (cruelty?)
Take a well-known leader’s
advice:
You should not examine legislation in the
light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, BUT, in the light
of the wrongs it would do and the harm it would cause if improperly
administered.
Lyndon
Johnson
36th
President of the
States
Prepared
by:
Al W.
Stinson, BS,
Affairs
Michigan Hunting Dog Federation
E-mail: LSFC2@aol.com
Review of an allegedly stolen camera…
Read more