I WRITE in response to Tom Fell (LET, Feb 3). Mr Clarke suggests ceasing to dock dogs' tails will cause suffering rather than alleviate it.

Docking for cosmetic purposes is painful, unnecessary and unethical.

It involves cutting or crushing skin, muscles, up to seven pairs of nerves, and bone and cartilage and is performed without anaesthetic when pups are three to five days old.

Those in favour of docking suggest it prevents tail damage in working dogs, yet docking has become standard in certain breeds regardless of whether the puppy becomes a pet or works.

And traditionally docked breeds appear randomly selected. German shepherds, foxhounds and bearded collies are not usually docked, while Jack Russells, boxers and rottweilers are. There are even anomalies within breed groups. The tails of cocker and springer spaniels are docked and yet Cavalier King Charles spaniel tails are not.

The argument that tails should be docked to prevent future injury is spurious. We would not consider amputating a baby's finger to prevent it from future injury, nor removing a cat's tail because it might get trapped.

The Animal Welfare Bill provides the perfect vehicle through which parliament can act upon sound advice from the veterinary profession and animal welfare organisations and ban the brutal and outmoded practice of amputating tails for fashion.

Gradually breeders' notions of canine beauty will then evolve to recognise that a perfect dog is one with its tail as nature intended.

HEATHER HOLMES, RSPCA Regional Press Officer for the North.