I certainly wouldn’t disagree with you; I’m not familiar with 48 of the states (in fact, I’m just an avatar in a computer). But my reference to controlling the real estate through a deed was a reference to vesting interests before the death, and doing so using traditional real estate principles to dictate inheritance. (Important caveat: by doing this, you’d be giving this heir of yours a veto over any deed or mortgaging of the property).
So, for example, if you want another person to inherit your home from you when you die, you can join them on the deed as a “joint tenant with right of survivorship”; by operation of law, a joint tenant automatically inherits the remaining interest of the other person upon death (a married couple is usually considered a special kind of joint tenancy, so if the property is owned by A & B, husband and wife, the inheritance rules automatically make the surviving spouse inherit the title).
But let’s say, instead, that you co-own property, but want your kids to inherit your interest, rather than the co-owner. In that case, crafting the deed so that you are “tenants in common” will ensure that your interest remains with your heirs. Want to leave the property to one person as a residence for the rest of their life, and only after they die leave it to others (e.g. you want to save the house for mom to live out her years, but then it goes to the kids to sell and make a profit)? You can do that, too - life estate to one heir, remainder to the others. You can even arrange to deed it to somebody with conditions attached (like, your childhood residence must always be used as a museum; racist or bigoted nonsense won’t be enforceable)
Simple point being that there is some exercise of control over property via deed that can obviate the need for other estate documents.
Now THAT is a good reason for a trust. The animals are an obvious example of a beneficiary (it doesn’t have to be a person; it could be an animal, or an entity like a charitable organization) that needs the assistance of a trustee to manage their affairs. The trust would provide money to fund the beneficiaries’ needs, and the trustee is legally obligated to follow trust instructions in using that money for the beneficiaries’ benefit.
This is also true for minor children - a trust for caring for them is useful, especially since it can include conditions you may want to impose (e.g. as long as they are in school, they get a stipend for room and board; cash bonus for waiting until after 25 to get married…). How to fund it? Get life insurance and make the trust the beneficiary.
And while I generally think wills are overrated, I don’t think that about living wills (and/or medical directives). These apply to if you become incapacitated and list your wishes/empower somebody to make your decisions. This is a real possibility ("pull the plug! “No, I want to!” “Me!”), far more than the imagined family crisis over a used car and out of fashion wardrobe that is avoided by an airtight will.