Of this, I have no doubt. It’s not an easy answer. There *is* a genetic component and the arbitrary breeding of Dog breed A to dog breed B just to fill a market niche is no more the answer than abandoning whole races of dogs. My comment about Cotton and my friends’ cat having the same type of cancer in the exact same location makes me think that there are other things at play. Neither animal had ever shared any of the same resources but the one thing they did have in common was the use of the right hip as an injection site for boosters. Is that a reason two otherwise healthy animals succumbed? Bill’s cat was a rehabbed feral, so it’s hard knowing. Cotton was a purebred dog with no risk indicators. I was not aware of any cancer in the pedigree. It doesn’t mean it didn’t exist, I just was never apprised of any.

I agree with your suggestion about the compulsive need to “save” everything, and allowing these animals to become bonafide members of the genetic pool. I alluded to that as well. Environmentally, I think there is a far greater risk from the pesticides and herbicides that leech into our groundwater from agriculture (At least in Cotton’s case, he was raised on old farmland, and we moved to a cut of ground with a waterway that provides ample runoff from agriculture, as well as the suburban sprawl) and the spread of suburbia’s desire to make beautiful, perfect lawns out of every inch or arable ground they don’t make into parking lots.

It’s a conundrum. It’s a disturbing trend. It wasn’t that long ago I heard of dogs living into their late teens and early twenties. I personally owned a dog that was close to 18 when he died, a cat that lived to 22. What happened?