Cosmetic Tampering With Nature to Develop Pet Dog Breeds

If you notice pet dogs, most belong to certain breeds which have been developed through selective breeding over the time. If we look at different breeds of dogs, some have small legs, some are polite, while some others are dangerous. Humans wanted certain “traits” in their pet dogs, and hence they made them like that through selective breeding. For example, humans “made” some dog-breeds best fit for hunting and some others for companionship. All this has been done through selective breeding, i.e. not through any sophisticated scientific or medical process. But is it “fair” to do so?

When I notice some pet dogs, they have such tiny legs that they struggle to walk. Won’t they feel uncomfortable and if given a choice, won’t they choose to be taller? Some are so small in size, even smaller than cats. Perhaps they would fear even cats. What right humans have to make such small dogs, just because they looked cute, and make their whole life filled with “fear” (from other animals)? This is just a thought.

I tried to search the internet for articles and came across this one:

Any dog lover knows that Labrador retrievers are friendly, Dalmatians are hyper, and Australian shepherds are smart. Some dog lovers also know that Labradors are susceptible to hip dysplasia, while deafness and kidney stones run in Dalmatians. 

Breeding dogs for particular characteristics, or phenotypes, has been going on for centuries. Dogs are companions and workers, in service to humans, and they have thus been bred to accentuate desired traits. For instance, Dalmatians have long been coach dogs, in part because of their striking looks and their comfort around horses. Bred for endurance, they can run alongside horse-drawn carriages all day. When kept as a housebound family pet, however, a Dalmatian's excess of energy can make the dog seem wired and can lead to less desirable behaviors, such as gnawing on furniture.

"These restrictive breeding practices reduce effective population size and increase overall genetic drift among domestic dogs, resulting in the loss of genetic diversity within breeds and greater divergence among them," writes Ostrander, who participated in a landmark study of the genomic relationship of 85 different dog breeds.

I think that selective breeding of dogs just to make them be like something we can play with, is in a way their “exploitation”. If given freedom, dogs would naturally evolve to be stronger, better fitted for survival, and would have better health and wellbeing. But through selective breeding process, humans have reduced their natural evolution cycle and forced them to be like something static. It may not be good for the dogs as species. As we read above, some dog breeds are susceptible to certain health issues. And who is responsible for that?

Humans have been exploiting other species in so many ways, that this form of exploitation won’t be so visible. But just start thinking about it and you would open a Pandora box. For example, do you remember some people who claim to be “animal lovers” but keep pet dogs of breeds developed through selective breeding process? Is it “alright”?

- Rahul Tiwary