PBHSN Blog

By the Numbers: What ‘No Kill’ Actually Means

Posted by author-avatar

Everyone has heard of the label “no-kill” as in “no-kill shelter.” Once upon a time, it was a highly useful distinction. It signified shelters doing things the right way… saving lives, prioritizing adoption, refusing to euthanize healthy animals simply because they ran out of space. The label became a movement and is why you know the term “no kill”.

But here’s the thing. “No-kill” has also now become one of the most misunderstood terms in all of sheltering and animal welfare, and can be really dangerous to conversations around sheltering. Both things are true. “No kill” is a simple term with good intentions, but the gap between what people think it means and what it actually means has created real problems for shelters, for communities, and ultimately for the animals we’re all trying to help.

PBHSN by the Numbers

As a “no-kill” shelter, PBHSN humanely euthanized 47 animals out of 1,987 animals in our care in 2025, for a live release rate of 95.1%.

Wait. But PBHSN is a “no-kill” shelter. Have you changed? What does this mean?

The easiest answer is “no-kill” does not mean “never euthanize.” It never has.

Let’s talk a little bit about the history behind the “no-kill” label and why many modern shelters (including us) are moving away from using it.

What Is the Definition of “No-Kill”?

Best Friends Animal Society, the organization that essentially created the framework around “no-kill” in the 80’s, defines “no-kill” as an organization achieving a 90% save rate.

What does that mean?

It means the very definition of “no-kill,” based on the definition created by Best Friends, understands that a percentage of animals in shelters are suffering from irreparable medical conditions, are experiencing cognitive decline from extended shelter stays, or pose genuine risks to public safety that cannot be safely managed. Moreover, Best Friends is explicit about behavior euthanasia on their website, stating that the no-kill philosophy acknowledges that euthanasia may sometimes be an appropriate choice in “cases of irremediable canine aggression in which public safety cannot be reasonably assured and other interventions would compromise the animal’s quality of life.”

There’s a lot to unpack there, but the short of it is this: the organization that coined “no-kill” has always understood that humane euthanasia is part of responsible sheltering. The goal was never to entirely eliminate euthanasia as an option. It was to end the killing of healthy, adoptable animals simply because shelters ran out of space or time. Something PBHSN will never do is euthanize for space or based solely upon time.

Two Types of Shelters

PBHSN is a managed admission facility. What does that mean? It means we determine which animals we intake, and whether we intake at all. (I recently wrote a blog about our compassionate care processes that briefly touches on our managed admissions process at PBHSN that you can read HERE.)

Basically, there are two types of animal shelters. Open admission shelters are traditionally government or municipal facilities that are legally required to accept animals from residents. In local terms, that’s Collier County Domestic Animal Services (DAS) here in our community. And then there are managed admission shelters like us, which have the flexibility to determine our own intake rates. If our shelter is full, we wouldn’t euthanize. We’d simply stop taking in more animals until some are adopted.

This distinction matters when we talk about “no-kill” as a label.

About 15 years ago, I was asked to help “fix” my city’s open admission shelter. At the time, Metro Animal Care and Control was euthanizing 75% of every animal that came through its doors. Puppies. Kittens. All “bully” breeds. This was an unbelievably high number, but not entirely rare for a poorly run open admission shelter at that time.

I created new programming, found transfer partners, built a community cat program, helped remove the city’s ‘bully breed’ ban. We rebuilt the volunteering and foster programs and changed the fundamental way the organization worked, prioritizing quality of life and the best possible care for every animal. Very similar to our priorities now here at PBHSN. Within a year, that 75% euthanasia rate was cut by more than half to 30%. By 24 months, we had gotten it within the 90% threshold and celebrated our “no-kill” status.

Saving lives and helping animal welfare organizations succeed is my passion. I believe that’s how “no-kill” as a label was supposed to work.

But sheltering has come a long way in a relatively short amount of time. And the label now (or at least the misunderstanding of the label) seems to do as much harm as good.

The Problem with the Label

Here’s what I mean and where it gets complicated. The phrase “no-kill” sounds absolute. It sounds like a promise that no animal will ever be euthanized. But that was never the definition, and the gap between public perception and industry reality has caused real problems.

Dane County Humane Society, a respected shelter in Wisconsin that has maintained a 90%+ save rate for years, explains why they don’t use the term: “The term No Kill is often misunderstood as meaning a 100% live release rate or that no animal is ever euthanized. When an animal comes to us that is too sick, irreparably injured, or behaviorally unsafe to be around people or other animals, and we’ve exhausted all other options, we believe euthanasia can be the most humane and compassionate choice.”

Nationally recognized behaviorist Kelley Bollen, MS, CABC recently consulted with PBHSN and led a volunteer training. She said it aptly: “Calling some shelters ‘no-kill’ implies by default that there are ‘kill shelters’ out there. This simply isn’t true.” No one who dedicates their life to the humane and ethical treatment of animals gets into this work to euthanize.

Ultimately, the phrase is really damaging to open admission shelters like DAS who literally have to take in every animal brought to them by a resident of Collier County.

Brother Wolf Animal Rescue, a highly regarded shelter in North Carolina, frames it this way: “At its best, the No-Kill movement inspires a nation’s shelter system to save those who can be saved. At its worst, it pressures shelters to warehouse or adopt out animals who are not safe to be placed into communities, and confuses the public into thinking that the way to create change is to attack responsible shelters who are making humane choices.”

That word “warehouse” matters. (We’ll dig deeper into that below and in a future blog post about quality of life.)

What PBHSN’s Numbers Actually Show

At Patty Baker Humane Society Naples, we’re proud of our outcomes. Again in 2025, we had 47 humane euthanasia’s out of 1987 total outcomes. That’s a 95.1% live release rate (95.2% save rate), well above the 90% benchmark that defines no-kill. Moving forward in 2026, we will continue to stay well above 90% and fit easily within the definition of no-kill. As of the publish date of this article (Mid-March 2026), our current 2026 live release rate is 97.8%, which is great. We are working very hard every day to save lives and find perfect matches for pets. But also, you’re not likely to hear us use that specific phrase going forward.

Rather than leaning on a label that creates confusion (a confusion that we have seen online more than a few times lately), we’re choosing to be transparent about the actual work we’re doing. We talk about our live release rate. We talk about what it means to be a responsible shelter. We have created, and will continue to explain, our new operational processes (LINK). We bring in external consultants and reference the industry standards that guide our decisions.

All of this because we care, deeply… about the health and wellbeing of the animals in our care. We are dedicated to saving lives. But we are also dedicated to improving the discourse and conversation in the world of animal welfare.

Quality of Life, Not Just Quantity

One of the most important lessons we’ve learned from industry leaders is this: warehousing is not rescue.

When Brother Wolf published their groundbreaking piece on this topic, they made the math painfully clear. Take ten kennels, fill them with adoptable dogs whose average length of stay is two weeks, and you can save 260 lives every year. Fill those same ten kennels with dogs who cannot be safely placed, and over ten years you’ve committed 10 dogs to a life of isolation… while indirectly preventing 2,500 adoptable dogs from having a second chance at a better life.

This isn’t about choosing who matters. It’s about understanding that a shelter’s job is to be a temporary stop on the path to a forever home, not a permanent residence. The animals who flow through our doors deserve to go out of them as quickly as possible. Not because we don’t love and care for them (we do, deeply). And not because PBHSN is a “bad” place (it’s not… we take great pride in our quality of care). There are dozens of people here whose sole purpose is to make life clean, comfortable, and enriching for every animal in our care. They’ve dedicated their lives to this unbelievably difficult but also highly rewarding work. They deserve to move quickly to their forever home because shelters, by their very nature, are temporary places of rescue.

A permanent residence would be more in line with what a sanctuary does. PBHSN is not a sanctuary and should never attempt to be one. We are a community animal shelter and our mission is to save lives by helping pets find their perfect match… as many of them as possible!

We have to know and understand the responsibility in front of us. Our responsibility to the animals in our care. The responsibility we have to our community. And the responsibility to understand what we can do, and what we cannot.

The Bigger Picture

Here’s the reality of animal welfare in 2026. According to Best Friends Animal Society and Shelter Animals Count, shelter euthanasia nationwide has dropped from an estimated 17 million animals per year in the 1980s to approximately 500,000 today. Nearly two out of every three U.S. shelters now meet the 90% save rate threshold and many more are within reach. That’s extraordinary progress.

Progress doesn’t mean perfection. And we work hard every day to be thoughtful and responsible in our approach. We lead with our hearts, but work with our heads. We embrace collaboration and external, industry-leading consultation. We’ve brought in Maddie’s Shelter Medicine Program at the University of Florida to give us guidance on how we can improve processes at our shelter, and it’s working. We’ve brought in nationally recognized behaviorists and consultants to share their vast depth of knowledge and ensure we’re doing things the right way. We’re bringing in Dogs Playing for Life to help teach our team new and improved techniques for training and enriching dogs and cats.

Moving Forward

Ultimately, a term like “no-kill” that originally meant “save every animal who can be saved” has been simplified and misunderstood. It’s a label with good intentions, but problematic implications. Responsible sheltering must include humane euthanasia as an option for animals who are sick, suffering or who pose genuine risks to public safety. “No-kill” as a misunderstood term sets impossible expectations (especially for our friends at open admission shelters who have an unbelievably difficult task in front of them) and unintentionally creates a narrative of misunderstanding that ultimately hurts the animals we’re all trying to help.

At PBHSN, we’re committed to transparency. We’ll keep sharing our numbers. We’ll keep explaining our processes. We’ll keep referencing the industry standards and expert guidance that inform our decisions. And we’ll keep doing the hard, thoughtful work of responsible sheltering… one animal at a time.

Because that’s what compassionate care actually looks like.

Learn More

If you’re interested in understanding more about this topic, here are some excellent resources:

Newer
Meet Cailey Muir our new Foster Coordinator
Back to list
Older Caring Compassionately Every Day