@DebraDownSouth:
If you can't get a good temperament from a responsible breeder, something is wrong and byb breeding isn't the answer. You can get a PET from a responsible show breeder.
Perhaps in Basenjis you can. Some breeds…...e.g. GSD.....have become so exaggerated for the show ring it is hard to find any litter bred for show that is any good for working. Fortunately there is still a market for working dogs and you can obtain something decent from a breeder who specializes in turning out animals for police and service work, but it can be expensive. Not everyone who wants a pet has the budget or frankly the patience to look.
That makes me sick. 
I read a few papers saying we essentially do nothing with the laws but protect US horses from being meat, yet up their abuse/neglect etc by not allowing unwanted/unsound horses from being humanely killed for "profit."
The U.S. law is being circumvented and many U.S. horses are being sent for slaughter in either Canada or Mexico, so the law is not protecting horses but in fact is subjecting them to long trailer rides in inappropriate transport. Many die en route because of this. Better and more humane if they are killed close to home. There is no easy solution to the "surplus horse" problem. The lifespan of a well cared for horse is long and even winning race horses end up at slaughter houses once they are no longer useful.
You lost me. Environment doesn't effect or change the DNA on dogs being tested for Fanconi, nor is the very limited number tested with wrong results or those few who test clear/carrier that develop it really any type of anomaly– it is a marker test, not perfect and new.
Environment does effect the way genes are expressed. Cloning is proving that quite nicely. Same genes, different environment in utero, often different markings on the babe. I didn't mean the DNA changes, it doesn't. But you can get a different phenotype from the same genotype…..exactly the same DNA......which I find fascinating. Yes, thinking about it more, the marker testing changes are most likely mistakes, but there could also be something else at play here. In any case, an area worthy of more study, for sure.
Nor do twin studies show humans raised separate have different genes, just different development due to environment. That isn't different gene expression, that is environment variances resulting in development ie a fat twin and skinny one.
"Identical twins develop when a single fertilized egg splits in two, leading to two embryos. Because they both came from the combination of the same egg and sperm, they have identical DNA, barring the generally undetectable micromutations that begin as soon as cells start dividing. To a standard DNA analysis, they would be indistinguishable. Yet the parents of twins can usually tell them apart by subtle visual cues, and, while their fingerprints are generally similar, they are not identical."
http://www.forensic-evidence.com/site/ID/ID_Twins.html
This is the sort of subtle thing I mean…..same DNA, but slightly different expression of the gene due to environment. But the thing that jumped out at me from the epigenetic articles I linked to was this, "Diet and epigenetics appear to be closely linked." That got me thinking about the rise of many afflictions in our canines that used to be rare, if not unheard of.
I have always found genetics interesting. My neighbour breeds Paint horses, and before the DNA testing was available it was interesting to look at pedigrees and figure out the likely resulting coat colour from any particular breeding. Dominant was pretty straightforward, and so is simple recessive, but polygenetic, as in Overos, was always a crap shoot! Add to that the lethal white, which has blindsided more than one breeder when an outcross to a solid Quarterhorse produced one! Just when you think you are safe....
Really good explanation of polygenetic inheritance here: http://www.ashgi.org/articles/breeding_bingo.htm
