Moving past the pound model in shelters

Photo: valdisskudre/Adobe Stock

Animal sheltering practices in the United States have improved significantly over the past several decades, but outdated ‘pound model’ ideologies still shape the system. According to a pair of animal sheltering scholars, despite progress in reducing shelter intake and euthanasia rates, the system continues to rely on confining animals, restricting their freedom, and using euthanasia to address overcrowding. In a paper published in Animals, authors Katja M Guenther, PhD, MA, a professor at the University of California, Riverside; and Kristen Hassen, MA, a Center for Animal Studies and Public Policy fellow at the Tufts University Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine in North Grafton, Massachusetts, opined that to create a more compassionate and effective system, we must confront the historical roots of these practices, recognize their lasting impact, and pursue humane alternatives for the future.¹

In the late 19th century, local governments introduced the pound model to control free-roaming animals, particularly dogs and cats. Inspired by English animal enclosures, where humans confined stray livestock, the system focused on capturing and euthanizing animals to manage overpopulation. Since stray cats and dogs had no market value, authorities put down unclaimed animals. Over time, this practice became deeply ingrained in the institutional culture of animal control facilities, shaping the operations of public animal shelters today.

The pound model normalized euthanasia as a primary function of animal shelters. Shelters frequently face overcrowding because of rising animal intakes and limited resources. When overwhelmed, they turn to euthanasia as the default solution, despite years of efforts to increase adoption and rehoming rates. For example, a significant rise in stray animal intakes often leads to a corresponding increase in the number of animals euthanized. Investigators concluded that these trends show how the system struggles to move beyond its origins of managing surplus animals through death.

The pound model also promotes a lack of transparency, an issue that continues in modern animal shelters. Historically, pounds operated out of public view, hiding the reality of widespread killing from the communities they served. Today, many shelters, particularly government-funded ones, still lack visibility, the authors noted. The public largely remains unaware of intake numbers, euthanasia rates, and resource disparities. This lack of accountability keeps outdated practices in place and obstructs meaningful reform.

Another issue is the reliance on confinement and caging. Shelters use cages to manage animals, but the conditions of confinement often lead to the justification of euthanasia. Overcrowded shelters quickly become breeding grounds for disease, with animals experiencing stress, illness, and behavioral decline. When shelters lack the resources to provide enrichment, medical care, or behavioral interventions, they label animals unadoptable and resort to euthanasia. This cycle reveals the systemic flaws of the pound model and its failure to prioritize animal welfare.

The pound model exacerbates wealth disparities across communities, a problem that continues to affect modern shelters. Shelters in lower-income areas often receive inadequate funding, resulting in outdated infrastructure, limited medical care, and higher euthanasia rates. In contrast, shelters in affluent areas benefit from generous philanthropic support, well-funded outreach programs, and strong adoption efforts. These disparities highlight a troubling connection between socioeconomic status and the quality of care provided to shelter animals. In wealthier communities, animals experience better outcomes, while those in underfunded shelters face a disproportionate risk.

We must envision alternative pathways that challenge its core assumptions to break free from the pound model. One promising example is the trap/neuter/return (TNR) approach for managing community cats. TNR disrupts the traditional sheltering model by sterilizing cats and returning them to their colonies rather than impounding them. This method prevents reproduction, while allowing cats to remain in their natural environment, and avoid the stress of confinement and the threat of euthanasia. TNR proves that humane alternatives exist, demonstrating the potential to move away from the caging-and-killing mindset.

Addressing the root causes of the current sheltering system requires a broader societal shift. Shelters must move away from using euthanasia as an acceptable solution and focus on life-saving strategies, such as spay/neuter programs, behavioral rehabilitation, and foster care networks. Transparency and accountability must also become central to shelter operations, with public awareness of intake and euthanasia rates driving support for policies and funding that promote humane outcomes for shelter animals. It is crucial to recognize that the system’s failures arise from its historical foundations, not from the actions of individual shelters or staff members. Although dedicated professionals and volunteers work tirelessly to save lives, they operate within a system that resists change. Path dependency, where past decisions limit future choices, explains why shelters often revert to the pound model when facing challenges. However, this path is not inevitable. Shelters can redefine their roles by rejecting the legacy of caging and killing and adopting new, more humane approaches to companion animal welfare.

Reimagining animal sheltering requires changing how we view free-roaming animals, moving away from seeing stray dogs and cats as threats to recognizing their place within our communities. Policies focused on coexistence, rather than control, can help dismantle the outdated ideologies of the pound model. Shelters can play a key role in this transformation by adopting progressive practices that prioritize animal welfare and strengthen the human-animal bond. The US stands at a pivotal moment, where the growing recognition of the flaws in the pound model creates an opportunity for change. Moving forward, we must commit to building a sheltering system grounded in compassion, transparency, and respect for all animals' lives.

Ava Landry is a 2026 Pharm D candidate at the University of Connecticut in Storrs, where she is studying veterinary pharmacy.

Reference

1. Guenther KM, Hassen K. Coming to terms with the legacies of the pound model in animal sheltering in the United States. Animals. 2024;14(9):1254. doi:10.3390/ani14091254.