Many of the species of domesticated or farmed animals used by people since time immemorial, and who's path of evolution may mirror our own, and indeed in the case of the dog, be an integral part of ours, have been bred to a point where they can longer exist independently of humans, and may even be affecting our own quality of life as a result of their own.

I speak here of the industrially farmed cows, who have been selectively bred over the ages to have larger udders in order to satisfy our ever increasing desire for milk, to the degree that should they go for any period without milking, they are pained by over production which is against their natural cycles for the purpose of feeding young, and then become vulnerable to infection which is more than likely to lead to fatality.
Or sheep which if not sheered regularly, have their vision and ability to function normally impaired by the overgrowth of wool.

… and the many other species of bird and animal farmed for meat, milk, or hide for human consumption, each with their own legacy of peculiarity of specialised dependence on people.

In the domestic setting, as I have alluded to, the dog has evolved along side humans, and recent scientific study suspects that they have been crucial to the survival of human beings as they assisted them in the hunter gatherer phase of our existence, being first drawn to settlements in order to scavenge for leftovers, with those more naturally disposed to acceptance of human company and presence becoming the modern domesticated dog breeds we know today, and the others who did not, perhaps through more aggressive tendencies or who were more fearful of peope to varying degrees remaining as the wild dogs and wolves still found in the wild.
These two separate paths leading to an evolutionarily ingrained characteristics and tendencies of personality and survival technique or lifestyles that have all but rendered them as different species.
But if we look at a rural industry that until recently, existed in my own country, that of fox hunting (the horses and posh upper classes gallivanting around the country side), we have seen one untold story of a species who have suffered because of this selective breeding as a result of the hunting ban... the hunt dogs.
...These dogs have over many many decades and possibly centuries been selectively bred for their aggressive hunting tendencies which makes them keen hunters, but poor domestic pets. With the demise of this industry these dogs could no longer be maintained and kept by the estate owners and hunt operators, what with their no longer having a working purpose and economic value... and could not be sold on or kept as domestic pets because of the danger these inbred characteristics pose to the prospective new owner, and any who would come into contact with them without proper handling.
They therefore had to be destroyed, through no fault of their own, having no place in modern life due to a change in our sensibilities.

But also in urban life, we see many breeds of horribly named 'toy' dog, and others also bred for certain characteristics such as size, shape, colour, aggressiveness, passivity etc. etc. Which often leads to the poor health of the animals, some unable to breath properly due to genetic faults or walk properly, or some other defect.

All this should go to prove that our appreciation of animals as tools of our lifestyle to be moulded to suit our needs is rather a fault in people, and we should now be thinking instead of revising our relationship with animals from domestic, to farmed, as well as seeking to protect and conserve wild animals in their natural habitats.

Of course, much of this selective breeding cannot be undone completely, and even if it could, may not be advisable, not simply because it is impossible to undo our dependence on them for our own well being and lifestyle, but also for theirs.
One of the most disastrous things that could happen for these farmed animals is that the human race should suddenly, and in it's entirety become vegetarian or vegan... as many millions, likely billions of animals would have to be destroyed as they would, like the hunting dogs, no longer serve a purpose, and not be economically viable for those who currently farm and maintain them.
Even partially returning them to their natural states would deplete the yield and return on the investment made by the farmer to the point where the cost of keeping them meets or exceeds the benefit derived from them, and their destruction would again be likely.

But many animals could, and indeed should I think, be de-bred to some degree of their natural states in order to allow their species to become at least healthier, both for them, and us.

With regard to domestic pets there is no reason why this should not be instituted more fully in order to stop the unsettling and immoral breeding of purely cosmetic living animals for human lifestyle purposes or fashion.

I suggest a programme at a governmental level and offered as an international standard of agreement that seeks to bring about this de-breeding based on the principles of ensuring the basic genetic health of the animals, so that they are free from discomfort, pain, and peril of simply living with faulty genes.

After all, to be free of the immediate threat to life, and the relief of pain are among the most basic rights human beings expect and demand... it should not be any different for any animal life.