In the nanny's state ever determined efforts to control every aspect of our lives and prevent any sort of freedom, various Australian states introduced tail docking bans on dogs.

Now my GSP Siegfried had his tail docked as a young puppy and I prefer GSPs and similar breeds to be docked. It is traditional. It originally had a purpose - to prevent the dog from breaking its tail when backing out of thick brush.

His tail is not ultra short and still has a nice "docked" length. He certainly manages to wag it well.

The argument of the ever present "nannyists" is the it inflicts pain on the animal and so has no purpose.

Unlike a broken tail in the field I guess

I have a number of questions on this issue.

For a gun dog breed which has been docked for centuries, do you believe a weakness, genetic or otherwise, would have become apparent in these breed's tails?

Do you think a non-docked gun dog will have problems in the field?

Do you think the pain the puppy receives is so great that it is cruel and requires the Government to legislate to restrict personal freedom yet again?

I welcome any comments.