Janice Brown,

Founder and Editorial Director

It seems like articles are popping up everywhere these days about the strength of the human-animal bond. Speaking with colleagues, reading trade publications, and having people email me every bit of pet-related news means I don’t miss much. Just like Kevin Bacon’s six degrees of separation, nearly everything in my life comes back to pets.

There are many opportunities for animals to work themselves into our daily routine, even for non-pet lovers. Think about how many commercials, for example, feature animals. From toilet paper to carpet cleaner to insurance, adorable animals get people’s attention.

When animals are abused, however, it can raise even more awareness. When the Michael Vick dogfighting scandal broke, I heard an interesting discussion on the radio. One of the hosts believed Vick would’ve had a better shot at reducing the scrutiny and the charges if he’d hurt another human being instead. He reasoned that when a domestic situation makes it to the news, there are always two sides to the story. In this case, the victims were animals; helpless, innocent, and dependent on humans to care of their needs. There was no love triangle, no betrayal, and no hidden story. These dogs’ only crime was remaining fiercely loyal to a person who was using them as weapons.

Luckily, this level of evil is foreign to the majority of us. But when the underside does show its ugly head, I feel good that animals have earned a place in our society where this is unacceptable. The actions of the NFL and the companies connected to Vick through sponsorship deals were a direct response to the public’s cry for justice. We should remember how loud our voice can be when we all speak as one.

And speaking of voices, you, our readers, have been heard! The votes have been counted, and we are happy to present the best of the best. Congratulations to all of the Readers’ Choice winners who were chosen by the Tails readers as outstanding companies with amazing products and services.

Happy fall-

Jason A. Heidemann,

Executive Editor

Remember how exciting it was to watch award shows as a kid? My personal favorites were the Academy Awards and the MTV Video Music Awards. What can I say, I’ve always loved the movies and I grew up a part of the MTV generation.

Everybody loves the spectacle, the pageantry, and of course, the outfits at these shows, but what I loved most were the nominees. I always try to see as many “Oscar bait” movies as I can each year and inevitably, I complain about the winners. I do this partly for fun and partly because I think it’s absurd to whittle down so many great films, actors, cinematographers, etc. to one single achievement. As it happens, we’re in the midst of award season right here at Tails.

Since we began publishing pet-focused magazines in 2000, our annual Readers’ Choice Awards have become a source of buzz among pet businesses, pet consumers, and industry professionals. Why? Because, let’s face it, we live in a consumer society and like it or not, pets have become an integral part of that.

Americans are collectively spending billions of dollars a year on their pets, and for the most part, it’s a good thing. Americans also love options. We don’t want to just turn to the nearest pet superstore to meet our consumer needs. We want to choose among dozens of independent boutiques that cater to our animal’s every whim. The same is true for our choice in dog trainers, pet sitters, veterinarians, and so forth. That’s why we have our Readers’ Choice Awards. They’re your opportunity to have a voice when determining what is best in your community.

Of course, nothing is perfect. And in many instances, more than one business deserves to be No. 1. But hey, if we can forgive the Academy for giving the 2005 Best Picture Award to Crash, then we can forgive anything. Enjoy our 2007 Readers’ Choice Awards.

See you at the movies—

Letters

Dear Tails editors,

I would like to make a brief comment about the interview by Laura Oppenheimer with Nathan J. Winograd in the recent September issue.

Winograd states that, "What the no-kill movement is trying to do is to go back to these (early SPCA's) original roots." This statement is somewhat misleading as none of the early SPCAs on the East Coast held a no-kill policy. The first SPCAs in NYC, Philadelphia, and Massachusetts were all trying to find more humane disposal of unwanted cats and dogs. They were trying to rid the streets of stray animals and eradicate the widespread practice of mass drownings, shooting, or beating dogs to death. A no-kill policy was not part of Henry Bergh or George Angell's thoughts in the 19th century.

The first no-kill shelter in America came about in 1903 under the direction of Flora D'auby Jenkin Kibbe in New York—37 years after the ASPCA was founded in 1866. She got her inspiration from French no-kill shelter models. Most American shelters did NOT take on this policy.

All this said, I was intrigued by the interview and the prospect of reading Winograd's book and if he includes historical data on the origins of no-kill shelters.

Many thanks,
- Amy Huprich Cook
The University of Cincinnati

Winograd responds:

Actually Amy is wrong. Bergh was opposed to taking over animal control and argued that dogs and cats should not be killed. He never wanted the ASPCA to take over the pound contract. They certainly did not call it no-kill, but that is exactly what it was.

- Nathan J. Winograd
Director
No Kill Advocacy Center