Dogs have utility that cows don't. They're useful for hunting and home defence. You don't eat dog for the same reason you don't eat horse. They're more useful to you alive.
Honestly, I don't know if I necessarily agree with this. Sure, dogs can hunt and be used as home defense, unlike cows. But likewise, cows have utility that dogs don't. For example, producing milk or being particularly useful when it comes to certain idiosyncratic agricultural tasks. Or, for instance, the fact that their dung can be used as a fuel (in India) or to fertilize (Indian) crops. With that, I wouldn't necessarily call them entirely useless. However, their usefulness as being meat probably outweigh the things I mentioned. On top of that, how many people actually use these utilities (aside from Indians) would be a different story.
But anyway, I would imagine there is a sizeable amount of dog breeds which are incapable of hunting and home defense. In that, this isn't unanimously applicable to all dogs. In my opinion, it would probably be more logical to buy a firearm (in the US) for that reason. In that, it doesn't need to be fed, cared for, and isn't prone to dying. Which ultimately makes it probably more useful. You could argue that, in tandem, if you bought a dog and a gun they would have a synergistic effect or whatever. Though, this is a side tangent. Now, what I think is the primary reason why people buy dogs and value them highly, in the first place, is because of their usefulness as emotionally uplifting tools. That is, as a way to deal with loneliness, anxiety, depression, etc. And as means to feel responsible for something or have a tangible reason to exist because something depends on you. As opposed to hunting, home defense, etc., which people rarely utilize. It could be argued that cows and pigs can serve this purpose too.
Anyway, what I'm trying to get at is I don't necessarily see, aside from the utility aspect, any fundamental difference between a cow and a pig. In other words, I wouldn't get mad if a chink eats a dog like how I wouldn't get mad if an American eats a hamburger. And so I wouldn't morally weigh one action over the other. Furthermore, I don't think the reason why people look down at dog eating or why it's frown down upon is because of the utility aspect. (You didn't make that argument, I know.)
But ultimately the reason why these species exist anyway is solely because of their historical usefulness like with cats (killing rodents to protect food) and dogs (to be used as hunting). But, as a general rule of thumb, I don't believe the majority of people need this/care for it anymore.
But whatever, I couldn't care less if it was one way or another; but I think there is a slight hypocrisy there when it comes normies. (And that's my main contention.) To be clear: I don't subscribe to vegan ethics, but I do hate the virtue signaling that women and normgroids partake in. They'll spit the same empty mantras like "I love dogs and animals" then will go to McDonalds and buy a quarter pounder or whatever. And fully benefit from the animal agricultural industry, while on the hand, complaining about dogs getting massacred in China. It's yet another form of normgroid cognitive dissonance and virtue signaling that I hate.
I don't know. I don't really have a problem with you said, I guess. But I don't think the majority of people think that way.
