Selective breeding is the process in which humans only breed certain organisms with the objective of producing offspring with certain desirable traits (West). For example, a dog breeder might breed a male dog with brown hair with a female dog with brown hair so that the offspring will most likely have brown hair. Whereas this is the most rudimentary example of selective breeding, this is the fundamental basis of the practice. Selective breeding as a practice is believed to have been started around 10,000 years ago during a period when resources were scarce and it could be utilized in order to produce animals and plants with beneficial traits. Apart from that, selective breeding was “invented” independently in different parts of the world at various times. The fundamental difference between selective breeding and natural breeding is that natural breeding favors traits that make the animals more evolutionarily fit for their environment. Evolutionarily unfit genes will become eradicated throughout a species due to natural breeding because these genes will cause diseases or other shortcomings in the species. The affected portion of a species will die off, only leaving the healthy beings to reproduce. When animals are selectively bred, these unfit genes will persevere and continue to affect the animals. Selective breeding favors whatever trait the breeder wants to preserve, without concern for the evolutionary fitness of the offspring. During the primal instances of selective breeding, the breeders were breeding for certain traits and did not know the genetic consequences it could cause. Now as technology has become more advanced, there is less need to selectively breed animals for certain traits. Much selective breeding seen in domesticated animals today is much more trivial and senseless. Over thousands of years of selective breeding has caused irreversible changes in many animal species. Now that people know the disadvantages of selective breeding and it serves less purpose, it should be a less common place practice.

My history with pets is extensive and plays a part in the opinion I hold on selective breeding. Growing up in a family with one brother, a dad, a mom, and me, there was always room for a few fuzzy creatures here and there. Since before I can remember we have had two cats, Bono and Sting (named after the rock stars of course). Bono and Sting were given to my parents from a family friend due to them not having proper homes. Later, when I was around 7 years of age, my wonderfully gracious mother brought home a stray dog that had been wandering around the streets of Downtown Greer with no owner. Thus, Gidget was then a part of our lives. Gidget got pregnant from one of our neighbor’s dogs and birthed a small litter of just one. That one dog became Ruby, another lovable creature my family couldn’t live without. About a year ago, someone at my mom’s office brought in a small dog with no owner. We gave him a home too, and named him Jesús. Now, not one of these animals had a pure pedigree of any sort. Both cats were of no specific breed. Gidget somewhat resembled a pitbull, but there was no way to tell how purebred she was. That didn’t really concern us though. She was a loving member of the family regardless. Since Ruby was Gidget’s offspring, and her father was a random dog from our neighborhood, Ruby is a conglomerate of dog breeds and she really resembles no specific breed. Jesús was a rescue dog who was supposedly “half Chihuahua, half husky”, but that seems unlikely as he has traits that don’t seem to come from either dog. Gidget was an adult when we first got her, and she lived for another 6 years after that before developing cancer. Every other animal on this list is still alive and has had minimal health issues. The cats are about to be 16 years old! Apart from when Gidget was diagnosed with cancer and when Ruby got hit by a car (she received serious injuries but recovered quickly), none of our animals have had to receive any serious medical attention. They have had no surgeries or no need for medicine of any sort. The only times my pets have had to go to the vet is when they were due for a checkup appointment. The pets my family have had have always been healthy, despite not having any certifications of pure-bred lineage or a certain breed to be categorized in. Whenever I got old enough to seriously consider this, it made me rethink the term “purebred” and why it carries such a positive connotation in our society.

Selective breeding was first practiced in plants and practiced in animals much later. Gregor Mendel, a scientist who is widely regarded as the world’s first geneticist, did some of the first research on the effects of selective breeding. Animals that are more commonly domesticated (dogs, cows, sheep, bulls etc.) are easier to breed due to their sociability (West). These are the animals that were used in the first examples of selective breeding. Sheep would be bred for a certain color of wool, cows would be bred to be larger, etc. The biggest example of selective breeding in the current world is “pure bred” dogs. In the late 19th century, certain clubs were established in Britain, America, and France to track the pedigree (the record of descent of an animal, showing it to be purebred) of certain dogs that would establish them as “pure-bred” (CollegeHumor). These pure-bred dogs would qualify to enter contests and clubs that non pure-bred dogs could not enter. This soon established a belief that pure-bred dogs were better than other dogs because they could compete in contests, hence the establishment of the term “mutt” for dogs of a non pure-bred pedigree. The term mutt has a negative connotation, whereas the term pure-bred usually has a positive connotation. This is interesting as much research has shown that pure-breeding animals has the same consequences of inbreeding, if not even being the same thing as inbreeding. 

Pure-bred dogs are bred to retain the traits that people want without regard for the actual fitness of the dog. Golden retrievers, a popular family-friendly dog breed, are the third most popular dog breed in the USA according the American Kennel Club (Upmalis). Despite their popularity, these dogs are riddled with genetic deficiencies. Over 50 percent of Golden retrievers die of cancer, and a large portion of golden retrievers also develop hip dysplasia in their lives (Collegehumor). If these dogs are so effected by genetic illness, then why do people keep purchasing them? Why do people keep breeding golden retrievers with other golden retrievers if that means their offspring have a higher chance of diseases such as cancer?

The answer to these questions is simple and goes back to two words in the previous paragraph: “family-friendly” (arguably one word due to the hyphen, but that’s not the argument at hand). Golden retrievers have a reputation of being good dogs for a family. They are known to be aesthetically pleasing, loyal, enjoy playing fetch and swimming, etc. The issue is that these traits found in the golden retriever are just traits found in most dogs. Nothing stops any other dog from being loyal or being able to play fetch. A lot of this comes down to how the owner raises the dog. But, since this common belief exists, breeders will continue to breed golden retrievers and people will continue to buy them. To put it bluntly and critically, dog breeders will breed these dogs with each other so that the offspring will have a higher probability of enjoying fetching a ball at the expense of also having a higher probability of developing cancer. These dogs are continuously inbred with an increased chance of hip dysplasia so that they’ll be cute. There are thousands of dogs in humane societies that are cheaper than purchasing a pure-bred dog and have less genetic defects because they have not been selectively bred, yet people still spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars on their precious, genetically defect pure-breds due to preference.

An even better example of the trivial nature of pure-breeding dogs is the American bulldog. The American bulldog’s body is obviously flawed due to selective breeding (Denizet-Lewis). None of the features the bulldog possesses help it from an evolutionary standpoint and only serve aesthetic purposes. Its legs are too short for its chubby body, its hips are weak, and its nose is stout and causes many breathing problems. The bulldog’s average life span is 8-10 years whereas the average life span of all dogs on average is 10-13 years. Dr. Nicola Rooney and Dr. David Sargan reported in an article that “The breed is noted to have locomotion difficulties, breathing problems, an inability to mate or give birth without assistance. . . . Many would question whether the breed’s quality of life is so compromised that its breeding should be banned.” The most disconcerting thing is that the very same traits that cause the Bulldog’s most common health issues are the traits that they are bred for. It's little legs and high body fat percentage cause it’s bone problems. It’s “cute” stout nose is the reason it cannot breathe well. Unfortunately, this is a trend seen throughout the dog breeding community. Bloodhound’s droopy skin on its face causes it to have eye irritation problems (PBS). Chinese shar-pais are susceptible to skin infections because of their wrinkled skin. Cocker Spaniels are more likely to get ear infections due to their big floppy trademark ears. To compromise an animal’s health so that it will look a certain way is borderline animal cruelty. 

A recent paper written by members of the school of veterinary science at the University of Queensland helps understand that no matter how careful a breeder may be, human interference via selective breeding will have unforeseen consequences (Sommerlad). The peer reviewed article deals with the genetic issue of deafness in Australian Cattle dogs, or more specifically congenital hereditary sensorineural deafness (CHSD). 35 dog breeds were reported to have issues with CHSD This article touches on the fact that dogs with healthy parents can still become deaf if their grandparents were deaf. This means that even though a dog had healthy parents, the dog’s parents were carriers of the CHSD gene(s) and passed it along to their offspring. Even if a breeder is very careful and tests the dogs they are breeding, there is still an increase in the chance of a genetic defect due to the high presence of an evolutionarily unfit gene in pure-bred dogs. 

Unfortunately, I could just list the disadvantages of each dog breed for the entirety of this paper. Certain terriers have issues metabolizing copper (Kim). Great Dane’s are more likely than most other breeds to develop hip dysplasia (PBS). Chihuahuas are more prone to heart disease than many other breeds. So, if almost every dog breed has an increased susceptibility to certain diseases, what is the appeal of dog breeds? Whereas there are some, and I want to emphasize the word some, rational reasons behind “pure-bred” animals, sometimes the reasoning behind it is as inconsequential as the aforementioned cocker spaniel’s floppy ears. A lot of it simply boils down to the connotation behind pure-bred animals. Many people have this unwarranted belief that certain breeds are better and that a mutt would not satisfy their needs. Proof of this is seen in organizations like the American Kennel Club and the fact that so many professional breeders run whole businesses based off the idea of purebred animals.  

Another reason to adopt a pure-bred animal is for the purpose of entering the dog into competitions. The American Kennel Club is a national organization that “is dedicated to upholding the integrity of its Registry, promoting the sport of purebred dogs and breeding for type and function” (American Kennel Club). Only certain dogs can compete in the AKC competitions as the owner must present a pedigree that spans over multiple generations. This encourages owners who want to take up the hobby of competing in dog shows in investing in pure-bred dogs. Breeding a dog for the sake of competition isn’t fair for the dog as it will suffer from the genetic consequences of pure-breeding. 

Some owners just need a dog with certain qualities. Barack Obama had an infamously difficult time selecting a dog due to Malia Obama’s allergies (Clair). Obama selected a Portuguese water dog as it is known to be a better dog for people with allergies. As it is true that some dog breeds are better for owners with allergies, these breeds do not need to be pure-bred. A mutt (or mixed-breed rather. The word mutt is getting redundant and has that awful negative connotation associated with it) with short hair that does not shed much will cause just as many allergy problems as a pure-breed with short hair that does not shed much. As it may be easier to tell at a young age whether a pure-breed will have these characteristics, this issue can be prevented by adopting a mixed-breed once it is year or two old and its hair is fully grown out. As this might prevent an allergy afflicted owner from owning a dog while it is a puppy, this is a preventive measure that might just need to be taken.

Sometimes people in need of a service dog need the dog to have certain qualifications, but as stated before, a pure-bred pedigree is not usually necessary for these qualifications to be met. A person with a service dog that needs support for an ailment such as bone disease will need a bigger dog that can support the owner’s weight. Great Danes and Mastiffs would be an option, but a large mixed-breed would work just as fine. A service dog for blind or deaf people needs to be “smart”, but most dogs can qualify as service dogs with the proper training. Some people need service dogs for emotional support if they have issues with ailments such as anxiety or depression. For a dog to be qualified for this, they just need to be friendly and cute. Fortunately for people with these ailments, all dogs are friendly and cute, so no specific breed has an advantage over another one. 

The reason I have discussed dogs much more than other animals is that dogs have been subjected to the process of selective breeding much more than any other animal. The American Kennel Club officially recognizes 167 different breeds of dog and the Fédération Cynologique Internationale recognizes 340 breeds. Regardless of which number is taken as fact, it is an unparalleled statistic. The number will continue to rise as “crossbreeds” become more popular, such as the labradoodle (a mix between a Labrador and a poodle) or the cockapoo (a cocker spaniel mixed with a poodle). As these dogs might not be as genetically unfit as their parents, once they are officially recognized and become “purebreeds”, they will suffer from the same consequences of selective breeding that all purebreeds do. But this issue does not just apply to the dog species. The cat, the second most popular pet in the US, has also been negatively affected through years of selective breeding. The Cat Fancier’s Association officially recognizes 42 cat breeds. Each of these breeds comes with its own set of health issues, much like how each dog breed has its own set of health issues (Cat Health Detective). Sure, it would seem like I was beating a dead (hopefully not dead due to a lineage of selective breeding preserving an unhealthy trait) horse at this point to list off some of the common issues in these breeds, but I feel as though I really need to emphasize the point. Himalayan cats tend to develop blepharitis, or inflammation of the eyelids (Think about how angry you would be if you suffered from chronic eyelid inflammation and you knew it was because you were bred specifically for your blonde hair or your blue eyes). Abyssinian cats have a higher chance of suffering from kidney failure. Birman cats often develop cataracts at some point in their lives. Cats are just as effected by the issues caused by selective breeding as dogs are.

Farm animals are also selectively bred, but usually for a different reason than household pets like dogs and cats. Farm animals are bred to be have more resourceful traits, not aesthetic traits or personality traits (Advanced Farm Animal Welfare). A jungle fowl will lay around 20-30 eggs per year, whereas a farm hen can lay over 300 eggs per year. These farm hens are more profitable for a company, but farm hens are more susceptible to bone disease. Chickens bred for meat can sometimes grow too fast and will not be able to stand due to their legs not being strong enough to support their stocky bodies. Cattle in the wild can live between 20-30 years, but farm cows bred for milk are usually so unhealthy after 3-4 years of living that they will be sent to a slaughter house as they are not economically sustainable any more. Whereas this is more profitable for said company that is selectively breeding these animals, it still causes genetic issues with the animals. Selectively breeding these animals makes sense from an economic standpoint, but is still very flawed from an ethical standpoint. 

The issues with selective breeding are evident and obvious. Natural breeding will only preserve whichever genes are in favor of healthy offspring, while selective breeding to retain a pedigree disregards this basic law of nature. Animals will have disorders due to a yearning for certain impractical traits. Even in farm animals where it is profitable to selectively breed the animals, it is just as ethically unfit. Selective breeding will lead to nothing more than unhealthy animals at the expense of human’s desires. Society needs to rethink selective breeding and how much their purebred animal’s pedigree is really worth to them. 
