I'm not arguing right and wrong here, just trying to understand. It would seem to me that the female incurs more costs and risks for pregnancy. That she owns the pups she produces would just make her more valuable.
Here is what I am missing: I would think that since the male's effort is close to zero, that most owners of males would be willing to undercut each other's prices, because maintaining the non-pregnant dog is not a lot of work. While the male contributes 50% of the genes, the female's health is more important since her body will be housing the puppies. From that logic, the female's genetics would be more important, and you could make do with a decent stud. Or even hedge your bets, since a dam's litter can have multiple fathers, correct?
Since this isn't the way it works in the real world, I can see that my reasoning is not the same as breeders'... it just sounds right to me!
